PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 1, 2026Bioresource Technology2 citationsOpen Access

Modelling health risks of urine-derived fertiliser application in urban green areas using quantitative microbial risk assessment

View Full Paper
JEJohanna M. EngelsFLFrederic LeuschPCPhil Choi

Key Points

  • This assessment aims to evaluate the health risks associated with urine-derived fertiliser application using quantitative microbial risk assessment.
  • Conducted a comparative risk scenario analysis for urine-derived fertiliser use.
  • Examined treatment options including membrane filtration and urine storage.
  • Assessed risks from ingestion of contaminated crops and exposures from occupational and recreational activities.
  • Estimated annual infection risk and disability-adjusted life years (DALY) against wastewater reuse benchmarks.
  • Membrane treatment significantly decreases health risks to acceptable levels.
  • Extended urine storage does not effectively meet safety targets without long durations.
  • Accidental ingestion of UDF from food crops presents higher infection risks than occupational or recreational exposures.
  • Residual risk can be managed through user guidance on product labels.

Abstract

• Health risks largely conform to the Australian wastewater reuse target of 1 µDALY. • Pathogen source concentration greatly affects how much the disease burden varies. • Membrane treatment can greatly decrease the health burden from urine reuse. • Hydrolysis alone requires long storage times to achieve adequate treatment. A comparative risk scenario analysis was conducted using quantitative microbial risk assessment for urine-derived fertiliser (UDF) use, considering membrane filtration and urine storage as treatment options. The risk scenarios examined included accidental ingestion through unwashed, uncooked home-grown crops; occupational exposure of workers handling and mixing UDF; and recreational exposure of toddlers playing in green areas where the fertiliser had been recently applied. The primary source of contamination originates from fecal displacement into urine during source separation in the toilet. Campylobacter jejuni and rotavirus were selected as reference pathogens. As no guidelines currently specify benchmarks for urine reuse, the annual infection risk and the DALY were estimated and evaluated against existing wastewater reuse benchmarks. The analysis shows that membrane treatment can greatly reduce health risks associated with UDF use: the risk was sufficiently low to meet annual, and DALY targets for bacterial and viral risks. The results also indicate that inactivation of both bacteria and viruses through urine storage is unlikely to meet safety targets without extended storage durations. The infection risks were higher during accidental ingestion of urine fertiliser on food crops compared to indirect exposure due to occupational and recreational activities. Nevertheless, the residual risk is sufficiently low to be effectively managed with additional, simple mitigation measures communicated through user guidance on product labels. In conclusion, membrane treatment technology could mitigate exposure to microbial hazards potentially present in UDF and may be satisfactory to reassure health regulators of its safety, thereby supporting progress toward sustainability goals.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Engels et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69ccb55116edfba7beb87510https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2026.134520
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper