By Challenge / Contaminant
Phosphate Removal Companies
Phosphorus removal, chemical precipitation, EBPR, sorbents, and recovery technologies for compliance and reuse.
This page is a good fit if you need:
- Automated pH Control Systems or Cartridge Filters capabilities
- Suppliers with manufacturing sector experience
- Providers operating in United Kingdom or United States
- Providers
- 75
- Verified
- 6
- Countries
- 17
Can't find the right fit? Post a brief and let qualified suppliers come to you.
Post a projectHow to choose a phosphate removal provider
Start with providers that clearly operate in your target geography and project footprint.
Look for industry exposure that matches your water challenge, compliance constraints, and deployment context.
Use technologies, service scope, and proof signals to narrow the list before reaching out to suppliers.
Not sure where to start? Our experts can help.
Filter results
Verified providers
6 claimed companies in this category
Country
Industry
Technology
Find a Phosphate Removal Provider
Showing 1-20 of 75
75 results from 75 matched providers
Phosphorus Removal from Wastewater: Biological, Chemical, and Combined Process Design
Phosphorus removal in wastewater treatment targets total phosphorus (TP) typically comprising orthophosphate (PO4-P, 70 to 90 percent of TP), polyphosphate (5 to 20 percent), and organic phosphorus (5 to 15 percent). Effluent TP limits vary by receiving water sensitivity: EU Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive requires less than 1 mg/L TP for plants greater than 10,000 PE discharging to sensitive areas (eutrophication-prone waters); less than 2 mg/L for 100,000 PE+ in normal areas. US NPDES permits commonly specify 0.1 to 1.0 mg/L TP for discharges to P-sensitive waters (Chesapeake Bay: 0.18 mg/L, Great Lakes: 1.0 mg/L). UK: EA sets site-specific TP limits based on receiving water classification, with enhanced limits of 0.1 mg/L for chalk streams and highly sensitive sites. Chemical precipitation (ferric iron or aluminium salts) is the most widely deployed technology, achieving TP of 0.5 to 2.0 mg/L reliably.
Biological phosphorus removal (BPR, also Enhanced Biological Phosphorus Removal - EBPR) exploits polyphosphate-accumulating organisms (PAOs, primarily Candidatus Accumulibacter) which release phosphate in anaerobic zones and over-accumulate it (up to 15 percent of cell dry weight) in aerobic zones. Process configurations: A2O (Anaerobic-Anoxic-Oxic), UCT (University of Cape Town), and Bardenpho (5-stage) achieve TP effluent of 0.5 to 1.5 mg/L without chemical addition. EBPR requires: BOD:TP ratio of greater than 15:1 in feed (volatile fatty acids, VFAs, as electron donors); anaerobic HRT of 1 to 2 hours; avoidance of nitrate in the anaerobic zone (inhibits PAO activity). Sidestream phosphorus recovery (struvite crystallisation, MgNH4PO4.6H2O, Ksp 2.5 times 10 to the -13) in digestate returns at 50 to 80 degrees C, pH 8.0 to 9.0, recovers 30 to 50 percent of influent P as a slow-release fertiliser (P2O5 content 28 percent); commercially available as Ostara Pearl, Multiform Harvest Lysosarc systems.
Chemical phosphorus precipitation uses ferric chloride (FeCl3, dose 2 to 3 molar ratio Fe:P) or ferric sulphate, or alum (Al2(SO4)3, dose 1.5 to 2.5 molar ratio Al:P). Precipitation reactions: Fe3+ + PO4-3 yields FePO4 (Ksp 1.3 times 10 to the -22); Al3+ + PO4-3 yields AlPO4 (Ksp 9.8 times 10 to the -21). Simultaneous precipitation (dosing to primary or secondary treatment) versus post-precipitation (tertiary clarifier) versus pre-precipitation (dosing before primary) affects sludge handling and effluent quality. Tertiary chemical precipitation with sand filtration or membrane filtration achieves TP less than 0.1 mg/L. Combined biological-chemical (hybrid) processes are most common at large plants: EBPR for bulk removal plus polishing chemical dose for permit compliance. Coagulation aids (polyacrylamide flocculants, typically 0.5 to 2.0 mg/L) improve floc settleability and reduce chemical dose by 20 to 30 percent.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the regulatory phosphorus limit for wastewater discharge?
EU Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (91/271/EEC, revised 2022/0345/COD): TP less than 1 mg/L for plants greater than 10,000 PE discharging to sensitive areas (eutrophic or at risk); less than 2 mg/L for 100,000+ PE in normal areas. US EPA: NPDES permit limits are site-specific; Chesapeake Bay Program requires 0.18 mg/L TP from large plants; Great Lakes Compact recommends 1.0 mg/L; many states have adopted 0.1 mg/L for nutrient-sensitive waters. UK EA: site-specific based on receiving water catchment status under WFD; chalk stream catchments and protected areas may require 0.1 mg/L or lower; standard sensitive area limit is 1 mg/L. The revised EU UWWTD proposed in 2022 introduces nutrient removal requirements for plants greater than 1,000 PE discharging to sensitive areas, significantly expanding coverage.
What is biological phosphorus removal?
Enhanced Biological Phosphorus Removal (EBPR) uses polyphosphate-accumulating organisms (PAOs) to remove phosphorus without chemical addition. PAOs store phosphate intracellularly as polyphosphate: in the anaerobic zone (no oxygen or nitrate), PAOs release phosphate (energy via poly-P hydrolysis) and take up volatile fatty acids (acetate, propionate); in the aerobic zone, PAOs over-accumulate phosphate using energy from substrate oxidation, achieving intracellular P content up to 15 percent of dry weight vs 2 to 3 percent for ordinary heterotrophs. EBPR requires influent BOD:TP ratio greater than 15:1 (ideally greater than 20:1), sufficient VFAs (at least 25 mg acetate-COD/L in the anaerobic zone), and strict exclusion of nitrate from the anaerobic selector. Achievable effluent TP: 0.5 to 1.5 mg/L in well-operated systems; supplementary chemical polishing brings this to less than 0.1 mg/L if required.
Can phosphorus be recovered from wastewater?
Yes. Struvite (magnesium ammonium phosphate, MgNH4PO4.6H2O) crystallisation is the leading phosphorus recovery technology, applied to centrate or filtrate from anaerobic digestion (where P concentrations are elevated to 50 to 200 mg/L due to biological release during digestion). Struvite forms spontaneously in digestion systems; controlled crystallisation in a fluidised bed reactor (Ostara Pearl, CNP PHOSPAQ, Multiform Harvest) at pH 7.5 to 8.5, temperature 20 to 25 degrees C, Mg:P molar ratio of 1.2 to 1.5 produces prill-sized crystals used as slow-release fertiliser (EN certification as mineral phosphate fertiliser in EU). Plant-wide P recovery: 20 to 50 percent of influent P; reduces chemical dosing requirements for downstream P removal by 10 to 30 percent. Regulations: EU Fertilising Products Regulation (2019/1009) certifies struvite as a component material for CE-marked fertilisers; UK Fertilisers Regulations (as amended post-Brexit) allow recovered struvite.
What chemicals are used for phosphorus precipitation?
Primary coagulants for phosphorus precipitation: (1) Ferric chloride (FeCl3, liquid 40 percent w/w): most widely used; dose 2 to 3 mol Fe per mol P (stoichiometric); pH optimum 5 to 7; produces voluminous ferric hydroxide floc with high water content (3 to 5 percent TS sludge); corrosive (pH of 40% solution approximately 0); (2) Ferrous sulphate (FeSO4, copperas): lower cost than ferric; requires aeration to oxidise Fe2+ to Fe3+ for effective PO4 precipitation; (3) Aluminium sulphate (alum, Al2(SO4)3.18H2O): dose 1.5 to 2.5 mol Al per mol P; pH optimum 6 to 7; used where iron salts cause aesthetic issues (colour in effluent); (4) Sodium aluminate (NaAlO2): used in high-pH systems (anaerobic digesters) where caustic conditions are acceptable. Polymer flocculants (anionic polyacrylamide, 0.5 to 2 mg/L) are added as coagulant aid. Chemical costs typically GBP 15 to 40 per kg P removed for iron-based precipitation.
A 95,000 PE activated sludge works in the East Midlands was failing its Environment Agency permit for total phosphorus (consent limit 1 mg/L TP), routinely discharging 3 to 5 mg/L TP into a phosphorus-sensitive watercourse classified as a Site of Special Scientific Interest. Biological phosphorus removal via EBPR was unreliable due to low influent VFA concentrations during dry weather.
The operator installed simultaneous precipitation using ferric chloride dosing at the secondary clarifier inlet (target Fe:P molar ratio 2.5:1) combined with a tertiary sand filter polishing stage. A phosphate analyser on the clarifier effluent enabled closed-loop dosing control. Struvite risk in the digester was managed by adding magnesium dosing upstream of the centrate return, recovering struvite pellets via a fluidised bed crystalliser.
Effluent TP fell to 0.4 mg/L on average (permit compliance sustained). Ferric chloride consumption stabilised at 180 kg/day, 22% lower than manual-dose baseline. Struvite recovery generated 1.8 tonnes per week of CE-marked slow-release fertiliser, generating GBP 28,000 per year in avoided chemical disposal costs.
Questions to Ask Shortlisted Providers
- 1
What is the consent limit for total phosphorus and is the receiving watercourse classified as phosphorus-sensitive?
Consent limits below 1 mg/L TP require reliable tertiary polishing; phosphorus-sensitive designations (SSSI, SAC) may trigger stricter limits under the Habitats Regulations.
- 2
What is the influent BOD:TP ratio and VFA availability for EBPR feasibility?
A BOD:TP ratio above 20:1 with adequate VFAs supports biological removal without chemical cost; below this threshold, chemical precipitation is the primary route.
- 3
Is struvite scaling already occurring in digesters, centrifuges, or pipework?
Uncontrolled struvite formation causes blockages and bearing failures; incorporating a recovery crystalliser converts a maintenance problem into a revenue stream.
- 4
What is the target effluent TP and what compliance window is required (annual average vs 95th percentile)?
Compliance basis affects design headroom; 95th-percentile limits require more conservative chemical dosing or additional polishing capacity to handle peak loads.
- 5
How will residual ferric sludge affect downstream digestion and sludge disposal route?
Ferric dosing increases sludge volumes by 10 to 25% and may reduce biogas yield by 5 to 15% in co-digestion; this affects totex and may influence choice between iron-based and aluminium-based coagulants.
What Drives Cost in This Category
GBP 15 to 40 per kg P removed for iron-based precipitation; closed-loop analyser-controlled dosing typically reduces reagent use by 15 to 25% vs manual.
Sand or cloth-media filters add GBP 0.8 million to 2.5 million capex per 10 MLD capacity; required where effluent limits are below 0.5 mg/L TP.
Ferric addition increases sludge mass by 10 to 25%, raising cake transport and disposal costs by GBP 20 to 60 per tonne DS.
Fluidised bed crystallisers cost GBP 400,000 to 1.2 million installed but can generate GBP 20,000 to 80,000 per year in fertiliser sales and reduce chemical P-removal load by 10 to 30%.
Key Regulations & Standards
Transpose EU UWWTD; set TP consent limits for WWTPs greater than 10,000 PE discharging to sensitive areas; limits typically 1 or 2 mg/L TP depending on catchment classification.
EA issues Environmental Permits specifying effluent P limits; breach constitutes an offence under Regulation 38(1) with unlimited fines and potential custodial sentences.
Phosphorus-sensitive SAC and SSSI catchments may require Habitats Regulations Assessment; EA may issue P reduction notices requiring sub-0.5 mg/L TP where water body fails to achieve Good Ecological Status.
Recovered struvite qualifies as a component material for CE-marked/UKCA-marked mineral fertilisers; quality and safety criteria must be met for Product Regulation compliance and avoiding Waste Framework Directive classification.
Explore Related Categories
Treatment Technologies
Related Challenges
Browse the full provider directory
Comparing phosphate removal companies is one slice of a larger shortlisting decision. Explore the complete directory of water treatment suppliers, then filter by region, sector, and technology before you request scoped proposals.
Open the directory