Biosolids Market by Treatment Technology (Anaerobic Digestion, Chemical Conditioning, Composting), Type (Dewatered, Liquid), Class, Source, Application - Global Forecast 2025-2032
Description
The Biosolids Market was valued at USD 1.83 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow to USD 1.93 billion in 2025, with a CAGR of 5.55%, reaching USD 2.82 billion by 2032.
Set the strategic context with a concise overview of policy shifts, technology advances, and stakeholder expectations reshaping biosolids management decisions
Biosolids occupy a pivotal intersection between sustainable waste management, resource recovery, and agricultural reuse. This executive summary introduces the contemporary dynamics shaping the sector, highlighting how evolving regulation, public perception, and technology convergence are redefining how municipalities, industrial generators, and service providers value and handle stabilized sewage solids. The narrative synthesizes cross-cutting themes so decision-makers can rapidly assess implications for operations, capital planning, and stakeholder engagement.
Over recent years, a heightened focus on contaminant management, greenhouse gas reduction, and circular economy principles has intensified scrutiny on biosolids pathways. Concurrently, advancements in treatment technologies have broadened options for pathogen reduction, nutrient stabilization, and energy recovery, creating new trade-offs between cost, performance, and end-use acceptability. The introduction of stricter regulatory frameworks and the growing importance of trace contaminants have forced operators to reconcile legacy practices with emerging compliance and market expectations.
This introduction sets the stage for detailed sections that follow by framing the core policy levers, technology trajectories, and market drivers that will influence decisions through the coming policy cycles. It emphasizes the strategic imperative for integrated planning that aligns treatment choices, product quality, and distribution channels with stakeholder expectations and long-term resiliency goals.
Understand how tighter regulations, maturing recovery technologies, and evolving community expectations are fundamentally altering biosolids management models
The landscape for biosolids management is undergoing transformative shifts driven by regulatory tightening, technological maturation, and changing public expectations. Regulations aimed at controlling nutrients, emerging contaminants, and pathogen risks are raising compliance thresholds, leading operators to consider treatment combinations rather than single-path solutions. Parallel advances in anaerobic digestion, thermal processing, and engineered composting have improved control over pathogens and contaminants while unlocking renewable energy and material recovery potential.
Market participants are responding by redesigning logistics, investing in modular and centralized processing capacity, and exploring offsite valorization pathways. Stakeholder engagement practices are also evolving: transparent data-sharing, community benefit programs, and demonstrable quality metrics are increasingly central to local acceptance. The convergence of environmental policy priorities and investor interest in circular economy projects has elevated biosolids from a disposal issue to a resource management opportunity.
As a result, organizations must adapt through cross-functional coordination that integrates permitting strategy, technology selection, and outreach. Transitioning from compliance-driven operation to market-oriented resource recovery requires deliberate planning, pilot validation, and the institutional capacity to navigate both technical and social risk arenas.
Assess the indirect and cumulative implications of recent United States tariff measures on procurement, supply resilience, and treatment pathway economics in 2025
The policy environment in the United States around tariffs and trade measures announced for implementation in 2025 introduced new considerations for materials that cross borders, indirectly affecting biosolids value chains linked to equipment, input materials, and export-reliant commodity streams. Though biosolids themselves are not typically a major subject of conventional tariff regimes, the cumulative effect of tariffs on treatment equipment, parts, and related import-dependent inputs can shift competitive economics and procurement choices for utilities and service providers.
In practical terms, increased duties on specialized treatment technologies or spare parts tends to raise the total cost of ownership for certain advanced systems, which in turn influences whether operators pursue localized modular solutions versus centralized, capital-intensive assets. Similarly, tariffs that impact the cost of feedstock handling equipment or drying systems may disproportionately affect smaller municipalities that rely on off-the-shelf imports. Additionally, changes in trade policy can perturb supply chains for chemical conditioners, polymer flocculants, or engineered media, amplifying lead times and requiring adjustments to inventory strategies.
Consequently, the cumulative impact of 2025 tariff measures encourages operators to reassess procurement strategies, accelerate qualification of alternative suppliers, and deepen lifecycle cost comparisons that explicitly factor in geopolitical risk. Ultimately, resiliency planning and diversified sourcing emerge as practical responses to price volatility and supply disruption risks introduced by shifting tariff frameworks.
Reveal how application choices, treatment technologies, material types, product classes, and feedstock sources interact to shape opportunities and compliance priorities
Segmentation insights illuminate where value and risk concentrate across the biosolids ecosystem. Based on application, the practical destinations for processed biosolids span agriculture where nutrient recycling supports crop production, forestry where stabilization can assist reforestation or soil conditioning, horticulture where product aesthetics and safety are paramount, and land reclamation where long-term soil structure and contaminant constraints dominate decision criteria. Based on treatment technology, operators select among anaerobic digestion for energy recovery and pathogen reduction, chemical conditioning options including lime stabilization and polymer conditioning to improve dewaterability and hygiene, composting routes that differentiate between in-vessel systems and windrow approaches to control maturation and emissions, and thermal treatment pathways such as drying for volume reduction and pyrolysis for enhanced stabilization and biochar production.
Based on type, distinctions between dewatered and liquid biosolids affect transport economics, storage needs, and end-use logistics, while class-based differentiation between Class A and Class B products determines allowable land applications, public access conditions, and labeling requirements. Based on source, the differing contaminant profiles and regulatory obligations associated with industrial versus municipal feedstocks require tailored pretreatment, monitoring, and permitting approaches. Synthesizing these segmentation lenses demonstrates that strategic choices in one dimension-such as choosing anaerobic digestion versus composting-cascade into constraints and opportunities in application, type handling, class compliance, and source-specific process controls.
Examine how Americas, Europe Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific regional dynamics uniquely influence regulatory approaches, technology uptake, and reuse pathways
Regional dynamics fundamentally influence regulatory priorities, technology adoption, and stakeholder tolerance for biosolids reuse. In the Americas, policy emphasis frequently centers on nutrient management, regionalized service models, and the integration of renewable energy projects at wastewater treatment sites, which encourages deployment of digestion and drying solutions alongside agricultural reuse frameworks. In Europe, Middle East & Africa, the regulatory tapestry varies widely; parts of Europe have well-established standards and market acceptance for quality-assured biosolids products, while jurisdictions across the Middle East and Africa are navigating capacity constraints, water scarcity concerns, and nascent regulatory structures that can both impede and incentivize innovative reuse projects. In the Asia-Pacific region, rapid urbanization, industrial growth, and intensive agriculture drive demand for robust treatment systems and distributed reuse models, with notable interest in thermal processing and composting to address tight land availability and intensifying environmental controls.
Across these geographies, cross-border flows of knowledge, equipment, and operational models are accelerating. Consequently, project developers and technology vendors must adapt commercial approaches to local regulatory nuance, logistical realities, and community expectations, while leveraging regional centers of excellence to pilot and scale transferable solutions.
Highlight how technology integration, service models, and quality assurance strategies determine competitive positioning and long-term commercial viability in biosolids
Competitive dynamics among leading industry participants center on integrated service offerings, technology differentiation, and the capacity to deliver compliant, traceable biosolids products. Companies that combine proprietary treatment technologies with operational service contracts tend to capture downstream value by offering guaranteed quality attributes that meet agricultural or reclamation specifications. Strategic partnerships between equipment manufacturers, process licensors, and logistics providers enable turnkey solutions that reduce procurement complexity for municipalities and industrial customers.
Innovation investments concentrate on energy-efficient digestion systems, advanced contaminant mitigation, and thermal pathways that convert residual carbon into stable products. Firms that invest in robust analytics, quality assurance protocols, and third-party certification frameworks strengthen market confidence and broaden end-use acceptance. At the same time, new entrants that focus on localized processing, digitized monitoring, and flexible modular deployments are increasing competitive pressure and encouraging incumbents to refine business models.
Leadership in this sector often depends less on single-technology dominance and more on the ability to align technical performance with regulatory compliance, stakeholder engagement, and demonstrable lifecycle benefits. Consequently, successful organizations combine engineering excellence with supply chain resilience, clear product traceability, and proactive community outreach to unlock long-term contracts and reuse markets.
Provide concrete strategic actions leaders can implement now to reduce risk, enhance product quality, and expand reuse pathways across treatment and application choices
Industry leaders should adopt a strategic posture that balances compliance, innovation, and stakeholder alignment to convert biosolids from a liability into a resilient resource stream. First, prioritize treatment pathways that deliver verifiable reductions in pathogens and contaminants while creating optionality for energy recovery or productization; this often means piloting hybrid configurations that combine digestion with polishing technologies or targeted thermal steps. Second, diversify procurement and supplier networks to reduce exposure to equipment and chemical supply disruptions; securing alternate manufacturers and regional stocking arrangements will lower operational risk.
Third, strengthen stakeholder engagement by publishing transparent quality data, facilitating outreach that explains safeguards and benefits, and developing community benefit programs that demonstrate local value. Fourth, invest in operational analytics and traceability systems that enable real-time process control, compliance reporting, and end-use certification. Fifth, pursue partnerships with agricultural, forestry, and reclamation end-users to codify product specifications and long-term offtake arrangements that reduce market uncertainty. Finally, embed regulatory foresight into capital planning by monitoring likely policy trajectories and designing facilities with modular flexibility to adapt to changing standards. By implementing these actions, organizations can reduce risk, expand reuse pathways, and position their portfolios to capture emerging opportunities across application segments.
Describe the rigorous mixed-methods research approach that integrates stakeholder interviews, technical validation, and scenario analysis to ensure robust, reproducible insights
This research synthesizes qualitative and quantitative inputs through a structured methodology designed to ensure robustness and replicability. Primary data collection included interviews with wastewater and biosolids managers, technology vendors, agricultural end-users, and regulatory officials to capture operational realities and policy perspectives. Secondary sources encompassed peer-reviewed literature, regulatory guidance documents, technical standards, and manufacturer specifications to validate technology performance characteristics and compliance thresholds. The analysis applied triangulation methods to reconcile differences between stakeholder accounts and published technical data, resulting in consistent characterizations of treatment trade-offs and implementation constraints.
Analytical techniques included comparative technology assessment, scenario-based evaluation of supply chain vulnerabilities, and sensitivity checks on operational drivers such as dewatered versus liquid handling requirements. Quality control procedures involved cross-review by subject-matter experts, verification of cited regulatory references, and iterative validation with industry practitioners. Wherever possible, the methodology emphasized transparent assumptions and documented data provenance to support reproducibility. This approach ensures that conclusions reflect a comprehensive view that integrates practitioner experience, technical evidence, and policy context.
Summarize the imperative for modular technology, transparent quality assurance, and collaborative partnerships to convert biosolids management into resilient resource recovery
In conclusion, the biosolids landscape is transitioning from traditional disposal approaches toward integrated resource recovery models that require careful alignment of technology, regulation, and stakeholder expectations. Operators and service providers that proactively adopt adaptable treatment architectures, diversify procurement pathways, and demonstrate transparent quality assurance will be best positioned to navigate regulatory tightening and community scrutiny. While technology choices differ by application and local context, the common imperative is to design systems that balance pathogen and contaminant control with energy recovery and material reuse potential.
Looking ahead, resilience in the face of supply chain and policy uncertainties will depend on collaborative partnerships across public and private sectors, investments in modular and scalable technologies, and a commitment to rigorous monitoring and communication. Ultimately, success will hinge on the ability to translate technical performance into trusted, certifiable biosolids products that meet both regulatory requirements and community expectations, thereby converting a historical waste stream into a sustainable resource.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Set the strategic context with a concise overview of policy shifts, technology advances, and stakeholder expectations reshaping biosolids management decisions
Biosolids occupy a pivotal intersection between sustainable waste management, resource recovery, and agricultural reuse. This executive summary introduces the contemporary dynamics shaping the sector, highlighting how evolving regulation, public perception, and technology convergence are redefining how municipalities, industrial generators, and service providers value and handle stabilized sewage solids. The narrative synthesizes cross-cutting themes so decision-makers can rapidly assess implications for operations, capital planning, and stakeholder engagement.
Over recent years, a heightened focus on contaminant management, greenhouse gas reduction, and circular economy principles has intensified scrutiny on biosolids pathways. Concurrently, advancements in treatment technologies have broadened options for pathogen reduction, nutrient stabilization, and energy recovery, creating new trade-offs between cost, performance, and end-use acceptability. The introduction of stricter regulatory frameworks and the growing importance of trace contaminants have forced operators to reconcile legacy practices with emerging compliance and market expectations.
This introduction sets the stage for detailed sections that follow by framing the core policy levers, technology trajectories, and market drivers that will influence decisions through the coming policy cycles. It emphasizes the strategic imperative for integrated planning that aligns treatment choices, product quality, and distribution channels with stakeholder expectations and long-term resiliency goals.
Understand how tighter regulations, maturing recovery technologies, and evolving community expectations are fundamentally altering biosolids management models
The landscape for biosolids management is undergoing transformative shifts driven by regulatory tightening, technological maturation, and changing public expectations. Regulations aimed at controlling nutrients, emerging contaminants, and pathogen risks are raising compliance thresholds, leading operators to consider treatment combinations rather than single-path solutions. Parallel advances in anaerobic digestion, thermal processing, and engineered composting have improved control over pathogens and contaminants while unlocking renewable energy and material recovery potential.
Market participants are responding by redesigning logistics, investing in modular and centralized processing capacity, and exploring offsite valorization pathways. Stakeholder engagement practices are also evolving: transparent data-sharing, community benefit programs, and demonstrable quality metrics are increasingly central to local acceptance. The convergence of environmental policy priorities and investor interest in circular economy projects has elevated biosolids from a disposal issue to a resource management opportunity.
As a result, organizations must adapt through cross-functional coordination that integrates permitting strategy, technology selection, and outreach. Transitioning from compliance-driven operation to market-oriented resource recovery requires deliberate planning, pilot validation, and the institutional capacity to navigate both technical and social risk arenas.
Assess the indirect and cumulative implications of recent United States tariff measures on procurement, supply resilience, and treatment pathway economics in 2025
The policy environment in the United States around tariffs and trade measures announced for implementation in 2025 introduced new considerations for materials that cross borders, indirectly affecting biosolids value chains linked to equipment, input materials, and export-reliant commodity streams. Though biosolids themselves are not typically a major subject of conventional tariff regimes, the cumulative effect of tariffs on treatment equipment, parts, and related import-dependent inputs can shift competitive economics and procurement choices for utilities and service providers.
In practical terms, increased duties on specialized treatment technologies or spare parts tends to raise the total cost of ownership for certain advanced systems, which in turn influences whether operators pursue localized modular solutions versus centralized, capital-intensive assets. Similarly, tariffs that impact the cost of feedstock handling equipment or drying systems may disproportionately affect smaller municipalities that rely on off-the-shelf imports. Additionally, changes in trade policy can perturb supply chains for chemical conditioners, polymer flocculants, or engineered media, amplifying lead times and requiring adjustments to inventory strategies.
Consequently, the cumulative impact of 2025 tariff measures encourages operators to reassess procurement strategies, accelerate qualification of alternative suppliers, and deepen lifecycle cost comparisons that explicitly factor in geopolitical risk. Ultimately, resiliency planning and diversified sourcing emerge as practical responses to price volatility and supply disruption risks introduced by shifting tariff frameworks.
Reveal how application choices, treatment technologies, material types, product classes, and feedstock sources interact to shape opportunities and compliance priorities
Segmentation insights illuminate where value and risk concentrate across the biosolids ecosystem. Based on application, the practical destinations for processed biosolids span agriculture where nutrient recycling supports crop production, forestry where stabilization can assist reforestation or soil conditioning, horticulture where product aesthetics and safety are paramount, and land reclamation where long-term soil structure and contaminant constraints dominate decision criteria. Based on treatment technology, operators select among anaerobic digestion for energy recovery and pathogen reduction, chemical conditioning options including lime stabilization and polymer conditioning to improve dewaterability and hygiene, composting routes that differentiate between in-vessel systems and windrow approaches to control maturation and emissions, and thermal treatment pathways such as drying for volume reduction and pyrolysis for enhanced stabilization and biochar production.
Based on type, distinctions between dewatered and liquid biosolids affect transport economics, storage needs, and end-use logistics, while class-based differentiation between Class A and Class B products determines allowable land applications, public access conditions, and labeling requirements. Based on source, the differing contaminant profiles and regulatory obligations associated with industrial versus municipal feedstocks require tailored pretreatment, monitoring, and permitting approaches. Synthesizing these segmentation lenses demonstrates that strategic choices in one dimension-such as choosing anaerobic digestion versus composting-cascade into constraints and opportunities in application, type handling, class compliance, and source-specific process controls.
Examine how Americas, Europe Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific regional dynamics uniquely influence regulatory approaches, technology uptake, and reuse pathways
Regional dynamics fundamentally influence regulatory priorities, technology adoption, and stakeholder tolerance for biosolids reuse. In the Americas, policy emphasis frequently centers on nutrient management, regionalized service models, and the integration of renewable energy projects at wastewater treatment sites, which encourages deployment of digestion and drying solutions alongside agricultural reuse frameworks. In Europe, Middle East & Africa, the regulatory tapestry varies widely; parts of Europe have well-established standards and market acceptance for quality-assured biosolids products, while jurisdictions across the Middle East and Africa are navigating capacity constraints, water scarcity concerns, and nascent regulatory structures that can both impede and incentivize innovative reuse projects. In the Asia-Pacific region, rapid urbanization, industrial growth, and intensive agriculture drive demand for robust treatment systems and distributed reuse models, with notable interest in thermal processing and composting to address tight land availability and intensifying environmental controls.
Across these geographies, cross-border flows of knowledge, equipment, and operational models are accelerating. Consequently, project developers and technology vendors must adapt commercial approaches to local regulatory nuance, logistical realities, and community expectations, while leveraging regional centers of excellence to pilot and scale transferable solutions.
Highlight how technology integration, service models, and quality assurance strategies determine competitive positioning and long-term commercial viability in biosolids
Competitive dynamics among leading industry participants center on integrated service offerings, technology differentiation, and the capacity to deliver compliant, traceable biosolids products. Companies that combine proprietary treatment technologies with operational service contracts tend to capture downstream value by offering guaranteed quality attributes that meet agricultural or reclamation specifications. Strategic partnerships between equipment manufacturers, process licensors, and logistics providers enable turnkey solutions that reduce procurement complexity for municipalities and industrial customers.
Innovation investments concentrate on energy-efficient digestion systems, advanced contaminant mitigation, and thermal pathways that convert residual carbon into stable products. Firms that invest in robust analytics, quality assurance protocols, and third-party certification frameworks strengthen market confidence and broaden end-use acceptance. At the same time, new entrants that focus on localized processing, digitized monitoring, and flexible modular deployments are increasing competitive pressure and encouraging incumbents to refine business models.
Leadership in this sector often depends less on single-technology dominance and more on the ability to align technical performance with regulatory compliance, stakeholder engagement, and demonstrable lifecycle benefits. Consequently, successful organizations combine engineering excellence with supply chain resilience, clear product traceability, and proactive community outreach to unlock long-term contracts and reuse markets.
Provide concrete strategic actions leaders can implement now to reduce risk, enhance product quality, and expand reuse pathways across treatment and application choices
Industry leaders should adopt a strategic posture that balances compliance, innovation, and stakeholder alignment to convert biosolids from a liability into a resilient resource stream. First, prioritize treatment pathways that deliver verifiable reductions in pathogens and contaminants while creating optionality for energy recovery or productization; this often means piloting hybrid configurations that combine digestion with polishing technologies or targeted thermal steps. Second, diversify procurement and supplier networks to reduce exposure to equipment and chemical supply disruptions; securing alternate manufacturers and regional stocking arrangements will lower operational risk.
Third, strengthen stakeholder engagement by publishing transparent quality data, facilitating outreach that explains safeguards and benefits, and developing community benefit programs that demonstrate local value. Fourth, invest in operational analytics and traceability systems that enable real-time process control, compliance reporting, and end-use certification. Fifth, pursue partnerships with agricultural, forestry, and reclamation end-users to codify product specifications and long-term offtake arrangements that reduce market uncertainty. Finally, embed regulatory foresight into capital planning by monitoring likely policy trajectories and designing facilities with modular flexibility to adapt to changing standards. By implementing these actions, organizations can reduce risk, expand reuse pathways, and position their portfolios to capture emerging opportunities across application segments.
Describe the rigorous mixed-methods research approach that integrates stakeholder interviews, technical validation, and scenario analysis to ensure robust, reproducible insights
This research synthesizes qualitative and quantitative inputs through a structured methodology designed to ensure robustness and replicability. Primary data collection included interviews with wastewater and biosolids managers, technology vendors, agricultural end-users, and regulatory officials to capture operational realities and policy perspectives. Secondary sources encompassed peer-reviewed literature, regulatory guidance documents, technical standards, and manufacturer specifications to validate technology performance characteristics and compliance thresholds. The analysis applied triangulation methods to reconcile differences between stakeholder accounts and published technical data, resulting in consistent characterizations of treatment trade-offs and implementation constraints.
Analytical techniques included comparative technology assessment, scenario-based evaluation of supply chain vulnerabilities, and sensitivity checks on operational drivers such as dewatered versus liquid handling requirements. Quality control procedures involved cross-review by subject-matter experts, verification of cited regulatory references, and iterative validation with industry practitioners. Wherever possible, the methodology emphasized transparent assumptions and documented data provenance to support reproducibility. This approach ensures that conclusions reflect a comprehensive view that integrates practitioner experience, technical evidence, and policy context.
Summarize the imperative for modular technology, transparent quality assurance, and collaborative partnerships to convert biosolids management into resilient resource recovery
In conclusion, the biosolids landscape is transitioning from traditional disposal approaches toward integrated resource recovery models that require careful alignment of technology, regulation, and stakeholder expectations. Operators and service providers that proactively adopt adaptable treatment architectures, diversify procurement pathways, and demonstrate transparent quality assurance will be best positioned to navigate regulatory tightening and community scrutiny. While technology choices differ by application and local context, the common imperative is to design systems that balance pathogen and contaminant control with energy recovery and material reuse potential.
Looking ahead, resilience in the face of supply chain and policy uncertainties will depend on collaborative partnerships across public and private sectors, investments in modular and scalable technologies, and a commitment to rigorous monitoring and communication. Ultimately, success will hinge on the ability to translate technical performance into trusted, certifiable biosolids products that meet both regulatory requirements and community expectations, thereby converting a historical waste stream into a sustainable resource.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Table of Contents
196 Pages
- 1. Preface
- 1.1. Objectives of the Study
- 1.2. Market Segmentation & Coverage
- 1.3. Years Considered for the Study
- 1.4. Currency
- 1.5. Language
- 1.6. Stakeholders
- 2. Research Methodology
- 3. Executive Summary
- 4. Market Overview
- 5. Market Insights
- 5.1. Integration of thermal hydrolysis and anaerobic digestion to boost energy recovery and nutrient extraction from biosolids
- 5.2. Adoption of struvite precipitation processes for efficient phosphorus recovery from wastewater biosolids
- 5.3. Regulatory drive for PFAS reduction in biosolids spurring investment in removal and treatment solutions
- 5.4. Implementation of advanced oxidation processes to degrade microcontaminants in biosolids treatment
- 5.5. Growing use of pelletization and briquetting technologies to improve biosolids transport and soil application
- 5.6. Circular economy collaborations promoting biosolids as sustainable soil amendments in agricultural markets
- 5.7. Development of decentralized biosolids treatment units for rural and remote community applications
- 5.8. Strategic alliances between wastewater utilities and agricultural cooperatives for biosolids resource management
- 5.9. Integration of AI-driven monitoring systems to optimize dewatering and processing of wastewater biosolids
- 5.10. Innovations in blending biosolids with biochar for enhanced carbon sequestration and soil fertility benefits
- 6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025
- 7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025
- 8. Biosolids Market, by Treatment Technology
- 8.1. Anaerobic Digestion
- 8.2. Chemical Conditioning
- 8.2.1. Lime Stabilization
- 8.2.2. Polymer Conditioning
- 8.3. Composting
- 8.3.1. In-Vessel
- 8.3.2. Windrow
- 8.4. Thermal Treatment
- 8.4.1. Drying
- 8.4.2. Pyrolysis
- 9. Biosolids Market, by Type
- 9.1. Dewatered
- 9.2. Liquid
- 10. Biosolids Market, by Class
- 10.1. Class A
- 10.2. Class B
- 11. Biosolids Market, by Source
- 11.1. Industrial
- 11.2. Municipal
- 12. Biosolids Market, by Application
- 12.1. Agriculture
- 12.2. Forestry
- 12.3. Horticulture
- 12.4. Land Reclamation
- 13. Biosolids Market, by Region
- 13.1. Americas
- 13.1.1. North America
- 13.1.2. Latin America
- 13.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
- 13.2.1. Europe
- 13.2.2. Middle East
- 13.2.3. Africa
- 13.3. Asia-Pacific
- 14. Biosolids Market, by Group
- 14.1. ASEAN
- 14.2. GCC
- 14.3. European Union
- 14.4. BRICS
- 14.5. G7
- 14.6. NATO
- 15. Biosolids Market, by Country
- 15.1. United States
- 15.2. Canada
- 15.3. Mexico
- 15.4. Brazil
- 15.5. United Kingdom
- 15.6. Germany
- 15.7. France
- 15.8. Russia
- 15.9. Italy
- 15.10. Spain
- 15.11. China
- 15.12. India
- 15.13. Japan
- 15.14. Australia
- 15.15. South Korea
- 16. Competitive Landscape
- 16.1. Market Share Analysis, 2024
- 16.2. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2024
- 16.3. Competitive Analysis
- 16.3.1. Agrivert Limited by Severn Trent PLC
- 16.3.2. BCR Environmental
- 16.3.3. Cambi ASA
- 16.3.4. Casella Waste Systems, Inc.
- 16.3.5. Cemen Tech Environmental
- 16.3.6. Cleanaway Waste Management Limited
- 16.3.7. Englobe Corp
- 16.3.8. Evoqua Water Technologies LLC by Xylem Inc.
- 16.3.9. Fomento de Construcciones y Contratas, SA
- 16.3.10. GeoEnvironment Technologies
- 16.3.11. Lystek International
- 16.3.12. Merrell Bros, Inc.
- 16.3.13. New England Fertilizer Company
- 16.3.14. Recyc Systems, Inc.
- 16.3.15. REMONDIS SE & Co. KG
- 16.3.16. River Birch Biodisk Inc.
- 16.3.17. Sabesp
- 16.3.18. SYLVIS
- 16.3.19. Synagro Technologies
- 16.3.20. Syngenta Crop Protection AG
- 16.3.21. Terrapure Environmental by GFL Environmental Inc.
- 16.3.22. Thames Water Utilities Limited
- 16.3.23. Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
- 16.3.24. Veolia Environnement S.A.
- 16.3.25. Walker Industries
Pricing
Currency Rates
Questions or Comments?
Our team has the ability to search within reports to verify it suits your needs. We can also help maximize your budget by finding sections of reports you can purchase.
