As the “carbon peaking and carbon neutrality” strategy advances, carbon emissions have gradually become a significant indicator in selecting and evaluating sewage and sludge treatment solutions. This study compared the carbon footprints of different digested sludge post-treatment routes, taking the Lu’an project in China as an example. Considering anaerobic digestion and digested sludge post-treatment options, the carbon footprints are as follows: 347.7 kg CO₂ (land application) < 459.7 kg CO₂ (composting-involved land application) < 858.4 kg CO₂ (brickmaking). In general, land application was superior to brickmaking from the perspective of carbon footprints. The power consumption incurred by aerating and turning and the direct N₂O and CH₄ emissions during composting increase the composting-involved land application carbon footprint. However, digested sludge that is not subject to high-temperature sterilization and compost is phytotoxic and can be fetid, which is a limitation of its applicability. And the composted sludge has a lower N ratio and water content, so the same N input means more sludge usage, which is conducive to solving the disposal problem of large amounts of sludge. Thus, if possible, composting-involved land application should be a preference, and improvements to the technique are required to minimize energy consumption and direct N₂O and CH₄ emissions.