Summary of Key Points
Rural sewage treatment is shifting from a focus on the quantity of facilities built to an emphasis on actual effectiveness. In the past five years, the treatment rate has doubled (from 25.5% to 55%), but many of the existing facilities have become inefficient or ineffective due to issues such as mismatched scale and technology (for example, a treatment plant with a capacity of 400 tons per day serving a village of only 57 people). The Central No. 1 Document in 2026 and the plans issued by the Ministry of Ecology and Environment have clearly called for the optimization and adjustment of such facilities. The core principle is to develop a specific plan for each facility, rather than maintaining all of them by default. This involves measures such as expanding the sewage network, upgrading technology, integrating the facilities into the existing system, recycling the treated water, or phasing out those that are no longer viable. The market has also changed accordingly: companies are moving from simply selling equipment to providing comprehensive services that include diagnosis, operation and maintenance, and optimization of the entire treatment process. Government procurement now places more emphasis on the quality of the treated water and the cost-saving potential of these solutions.
Example of Inefficient Facility Use
The most extreme example mentioned in the report comes from a village in the western region with only 57 permanent residents, which was equipped with a luxurious treatment plant capable of handling 400 tons of sewage per day (using a combination of biological contact oxidation, sand filtration, and artificial wetlands). This results in an average daily treatment capacity of over 7 tons per person—meaning that each resident would have nearly 140 times their own daily sewage volume being treated!
Why is this the case? In the past, facilities were often built with a slight surplus capacity in anticipation of future growth, but the actual needs of rural areas were overlooked. Factors such as population mobility (with people working away from home and returning only during the Spring Festival), low and unpredictable sewage volumes (farmers may use wastewater for gardening instead of sending it to the system), and scattered settlements (which increase the cost of installing sewage networks) contributed to the inefficiency of these facilities. The complex technologies designed for urban areas do not work well in rural contexts, leading to frequent startups and shutdowns of the equipment, resulting in wasted energy or untreated water.
Reasons for Inefficiency
There are five main reasons behind the inefficiency of these facilities:
1. Population and Water Volume: Villages are becoming sparser, and the estimated sewage volumes were miscalculated, leading to the use of excessive capacity.
2. Collection: Sometimes, the sewage networks do not reach all households, or there are leaks, causing the sewage to never make it to the treatment plants.
3. Technology: Inappropriate technologies were chosen—for instance, using activated sludge processes when the sewage concentration is too low (below 80mg/L), or deploying expensive equipment for small, dispersed villages.
4. Financing: Although the central government provided funding for construction, the operating costs are borne by local authorities. The high costs of electricity, chemicals, and labor are unaffordable for smaller villages.
5. Responsibility: No clear entity is responsible for managing the facilities, leading to a lack of decision-making and maintenance, resulting in their becoming inactive.
Optimization Options
Optimization involves various approaches:
- Simplifying Processes: In Suiping, Henan, 14 idle treatment plants were converted into three-compartment septic tanks, eliminating the need for aeration and chemical dosing, which reduced costs and improved efficiency.
- Integration into Existing Systems: In Wuhu, Anhui, two outdated facilities were connected to a centralized sewage treatment plant, making better use of existing resources.
- Recycling Treated Water: In Huadu, Guangzhou, the treated wastewater is used for irrigation of farmland and orchards, solving both the sewage problem and reducing the need for additional water resources.
- Phasing Out Ineffective Facilities: In Nan'an, Fujian, 23 obsolete facilities were dismantled, with proper management of assets to prevent loss of public funds.
The key principle is that what should be phased out are the inefficient systems, not the goal of treating sewage. The ultimate goal is to achieve effective treatment, no odors, and customer satisfaction.
Market Changes
The market for rural sewage treatment has shifted from companies selling equipment to providing comprehensive services. For example, a procurement case in Fengxian, Shanghai, allocated 5.32 million yuan per year, requiring the supplier to not only repair the equipment but also develop customized renovation plans (such as reducing energy consumption and improving treatment processes). The contract specifies that the local government will pay 600 yuan per household per year for on-site treatment services and 300 yuan per year for those connected to the network. If the water quality does not meet standards, the contract will not be renewed. Companies must now understand how to identify and fix leaks in the sewage networks, simplify complex processes, determine when facilities should be integrated into the system or phased out, and communicate effectively with both governments and local residents.
In summary, governments are no longer interested in simply acquiring new equipment but in services that continuously address sewage treatment issues. The focus is on having fewer, more efficient facilities that provide effective treatment and meet the needs of rural communities.
Future Trends
For future projects:
- Proactive Planning: Before building new facilities, it is essential to carefully assess the needs of each village—whether centralized treatment is necessary, how much sewage can be collected, and how long local authorities can afford to operate the facilities.
- Differentiated Approaches: Not all existing facilities need to be upgraded; some may only require network expansion or process modification, while others can be directly phased out.
- Market Dynamics: The market will include both new construction projects and services to repair or replace inefficient facilities. The challenge for companies is to find the most cost-effective solutions, such as reducing energy and chemical usage, or determining that a facility is no longer necessary.
In conclusion, the goal of rural sewage treatment is not about the number of facilities but about ensuring that sewage is properly managed, satisfying local residents, and maintaining affordable costs. Facilities can be replaced, but the effectiveness of the treatment process is what truly defines the success of the initiative.