In recent decades, academia has elaborated a wide range of technological solutions to recover water, energy, fertiliser and other products from municipal wastewater treatment plants. Drivers for this work range from low resource recovery potential and cost effectiveness, to the high energy demands and large environmental footprints of current treatment-plant designs. However, only a few technologies have been implemented and a shift from wastewater treatment plants towards water resource facilities still seems far away. This critical review aims to inform decision-makers in water management utilities about the vast technical possibilities and market supply potentials, as well as the bottlenecks, related to the design or redesign of a municipal wastewater treatment process from a resource recovery perspective. Information and data have been extracted from literature to provide a holistic overview of this growing research field. First, reviewed data is used to calculate the potential of 11 resources recoverable from municipal wastewater treatment plants to supply national resource consumption. Depending on the resource, the supply potential may vary greatly. Second, resource recovery technologies investigated in academia are reviewed comprehensively and critically. The third section of the review identifies nine non-technical bottlenecks mentioned in literature that have to be overcome to successfully implement these technologies into wastewater treatment process designs. The bottlenecks are related to economics and value chain development, environment and health, and society and policy issues. Considering market potentials, technological innovations, and addressing potential bottlenecks early in the planning and process design phase, may facilitate the design and integration of water resource facilities and contribute to more circular urban water management practices.

In this study the environmental impact of the anaerobic digestion (AD) of sewage sludge within an activated sludge wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) was investigated. Three alternative AD systems (mesophilic, thermophilic, and temperature-phased anaerobic digestion (TPAD)) were compared to determine which system may have the best environmental performance. Two life cycle assessments (LCA) were performed considering: (i) the whole WWTP (for a functional unit (FU) of 1 m³ of treated wastewater), and (ii) the sludge line (SL) alone (for FU of 1 m³ of produced methane). The data for the LCA were obtained from previous laboratory experimental work in combination with full-scale WWTP and literature. According to the results, the WWTP with TPAD outperforms those with mesophilic and thermophilic AD in most analyzed impact categories (i.e., Human toxicity, Ionizing radiation, Metal and Fossil depletion, Agricultural land occupation, Terrestrial acidification, Freshwater eutrophication, and Ozone depletion), except for Climate change where the WWTP with mesophilic AD performed better than with TPAD by 7%. In the case of the SL alone, the production of heat and electricity (here accounted for as avoided environmental impacts) led to credits in most of the analyzed impact categories except for Human toxicity where credits did not balance out the impacts caused by the wastewater treatment system. The best AD alternative was thermophilic concerning all environmental impact categories, besides Climate change and Human toxicity. Differences between both LCA results may be attributed to the FU.