Skip to Content

Why landfilling this material is the expensive option

The case for recovering nutrients from sewage sludge is usually argued on disposal cost. That is the smallest part of it. The larger argument is that New Zealand is burying nitrogen, phosphorus and organic carbon at one end of the country while importing the same three things, at volatile prices, at the other.

The soil is going backwards

In a February 2023 address to the New Zealand Institute of International Affairs in Nelson, the late Rod Oram set out the scale of soil loss. The figures he assembled are not marginal.

200m t

soil eroded from New Zealand land each year, into rivers and sea

75,000m t

soil eroded worldwide each year

75%+

of global land area already substantially degraded

<1,000 yrs

for 1–10cm of topsoil to form

Oram's sources were Environment Aotearoa 2019 for the New Zealand erosion figure, the IPBES land degradation assessment for the global figures — which put the well-being of 3.2 billion people at stake, and projected 95% of land degraded by 2050 if land-use patterns continue — and Landcare Research for topsoil formation rates.

Why this belongs on a biosolids page

Stabilised biosolids are one of the few materials that return organic carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus to soil at scale. Every tonne sent to landfill is a tonne of that carbon and nutrient not going back into ground that is losing both.

The nitrogen New Zealand depends on is imported, and made from gas

Synthetic nitrogen is manufactured by the Haber-Bosch process using fossil gas. Around 265,000 tonnes of urea a year is made domestically at Kapuni in Taranaki; the balance is imported, principally from Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and China. Roughly 429,000 tonnes of synthetic nitrogen was applied in New Zealand in 2015, and application has risen more than 600% since 1990 — the fastest rate of increase in the OECD. Dairy accounts for about two-thirds of the volume, at an average 150 kg per hectare. Those figures come from a 2020 Greenpeace New Zealand briefing arguing for a full phase-out, drawing on Stats NZ, MfE and Fertiliser Association data.

The dependence is not disputed by the other side of the argument. A 2019 report by AgFirst for the Fertiliser Association — written to demonstrate the value of synthetic nitrogen, not to criticise it — modelled what removing it would cost:

If synthetic nitrogen were removed Modelled national impact
Farm-gate profit, no substitution−$1.7 billion
Farm-gate profit, with substitute feed and legume crops−$2.1 billion
Gross output−$19.8 billion
Value added (GDP)−$6.7 billion
Employment−73,760 positions

Read those two sources together and the conclusion is not that New Zealand should simply stop using nitrogen. It is that an economy this exposed to an imported, gas-derived input has a strong interest in producing more of its own nutrient at home — which is precisely what stabilised biosolids and digestate do.

The supply chain is being tested right now

This is not a theoretical exposure. Between a quarter and a third of the world's traded urea moves through a single waterway, the Strait of Hormuz — the World Bank puts the Middle East at nearly a quarter of global urea exports, the International Trade Centre at a third of globally traded urea. Since the military escalation that began in late February 2026, that flow has been throttled.

−83%

urea exports from affected economies, April 2025 to April 2026 (ITC)

−75%

ammonia exports over the same period

US$850+

per tonne urea in April 2026, up 80% since February (World Bank)

+30%

forecast rise in the World Bank fertiliser price index across 2026

The disruption compounded: Iran halted ammonia production, Qatar suspended urea, ammonia and sulfur output after facility damage, India cut output on reduced LNG supply, and China restricted exports. Four of the largest sources of the world's nitrogen came off the market inside a single quarter.

What it has cost New Zealand farmers

New Zealand imports most of its synthetic nitrogen, and the bill arrived quickly. On 5 May 2026 Ballance lifted urea by $100 to $1,175 a tonne — a rise of 110% since January. Sulphate of ammonia went to $650 a tonne, up more than 40%, which Ballance attributed to "buyers look[ing] for alternative forms of nitrogen in the absence of urea supply out of the Persian Gulf and China".

Even the domestic plant is not insulated

Ballance's own assessment was that "our Kapuni gas-to-urea plant provides some buffer to international urea commodity price spikes", while adding that the company had "been working through uncertainty of gas supply and higher gas prices". A fertiliser made from natural gas is exposed to the gas market even when it is made at home.

This is the argument for nutrient recovery stated as plainly as it can be. The nitrogen and phosphorus already sitting in New Zealand's sewage sludge are not shipped through anyone's strait, not priced in US dollars, and not subject to another country's export licence. They are here, they are already paid for, and at present they are being buried.

Sources: UN News / International Trade Centre · World Bank Data Blog · Farmers Weekly, 5 May 2026

The trade exposure is becoming a compliance exposure

In the same Nelson address, Oram pointed to the European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, and to the possibility of nature-related border adjustments following it, as a live risk for New Zealand exporters. The EU–New Zealand Free Trade Agreement's Trade and Sustainable Development chapter is legally binding and, for the first time in an EU agreement, allows trade sanctions as a last resort for serious breaches of Paris Agreement commitments. We looked at what that means for exporters in The Carbon Border Adjustment Challenge.

Land application of recovered nutrient, displacing imported synthetic fertiliser, is one of the few moves that improves a producer's position on all of these at once: emissions, soil, and the provenance questions that increasingly follow a product across a border.

Related Pages