Hot Spots Subject to Numerical Analysis
Up one level
4.2. Hot Spots Subject to Numerical Analysis
According to the adopted methodology (see Chapter 3), the preliminary screening of Hot Spots was carried out on the basis of the total effective mass of contaminants. This technique was developed for comparative assessment of chemical pollution load associated with different pollution sources, and is based on the “toxic equivalent” concept. This technique employs existing discharge data, available in the State Statistic Database 2TP-VodKhoz.
As was mentioned before, the initial list of 510 polluting industries was identified in stage one. In 2000, these industries accounted for 57.85% of the total volume of effluent discharges (Annex А, Table A.1).
Further, the EMC values were calculated for these 510 industries using the 2000 statistical data reporting forms 2-TP VodKhoz, and used as score values for the preliminary ranking of selected Hot Spots. Ranking results are presented in Annex A (Table А-2). The calculation procedure employed the MAC values set for fishery water bodies, and actual discharge data for a full list of contaminants included in the 2TP-VodKhoz statistical reporting form.
Scheme 4.1. Scheme of Selection of Priority Hot Spots

Based on specific EMC values, the list of Hot Spots was identified for further detailed evaluation.
The calculation results suggest that in 2000, the total effective mass of contaminants discharged by these 510 industries was about 63,891 tonnes. Three hundred and sixty four (364) of 510 industries have EMC values higher than 1 tonne each, while the value of the total effective mass of discharged contaminants for each of the remaining 146 industries is below 1 tonne per year.
Also, the calculation results show that 200 of 510 industries account for 99.3% of the total effective mass of contaminants received by water bodies from these point sources, with 39 industries being the major polluters, producing 86.5% of the total effective mass of contaminants in the Basin. The remaining industries (161) account for 13.5% of the total effective mass of contaminants produced in the Basin. Further, based on expert judgement, the first 100 hot spots from the priority list of 200 industries with highest EMC values were selected for detailed evaluation (see Annex A, Table А-3).
In addition to the estimation of the specific contribution of these 100 Hot Spots to the total pollution load entering the Dnipro River, expressed as the effective mass of discharged contaminants, the following additional criteria were involved to promote these significant Hot Spots to the next step of analysis (see Section 3.2 “The Methodology”):
М.1. Total annual mass of discharged contaminants (including organic substances (in terms of BOD) and nitrogen) is more than 1% of the total annual ‘watershed’ load;
М.2. Total annual hydraulic loading (discharge volume) is more than 0.4–1.7% of the total annual ‘watershed’ flow.
A review of available data indicates that 10 municipal utilities meet the numeric criterion set for organic pollution load (in terms of BOD), 9 utilities contribute more than 1% to the total nitrogen pollution load each, and 4 municipal utilities account for more than 0.4-1.7% of the total annual ‘watershed’ flow (see Table 4.1).
In the industrial sector, the numeric criterion set for organic/nitrogen pollution load and annual hydraulic loading was met by 3 and 4 industries, respectively (Table 4.2).
Table 4.1: Preliminary Screening of Hot Spots using Additional Promotion Criteria. Municipal Sector
|
# |
Industry/Site |
М1. Annual Mass Loading |
М2. Annual Hydraulic Loading |
|
|
BOD, % of the Basin total |
Nitrogen, % of the Basin total |
% of the Basin total |
||
|
1 |
Kyiv Vodokanal Company |
10.62 |
20.26 |
8.465 |
|
2 |
Dnipropetrovsk Water Utility |
16.80 |
11.24 |
3.402 |
|
3 |
Lutsk Vodokanal Utility |
1.59 |
4.45 |
0.379 |
|
4 |
Krivy Rig Water Utility |
3.47 |
3.17 |
1.949 |
|
5 |
Chernigiv Vodokanal Company |
1.21 |
5.92 |
0.539 |
|
6 |
Zhitomyr Water Utility |
5.38 |
2.66 |
0.311 |
|
7 |
Zaporizhzhia Vodokanal Company |
9.27 |
6.62 |
2.467 |
|
8 |
Sumy Vodokanal Company |
2.11 |
2.22 |
0.496 |
|
9 |
Kherson Water Utility |
1.38 |
0.03 |
0.457 |
|
10 |
Konotop Water Utility |
1.68 |
1.03 |
0.082 |
Table 4.2 : Preliminary Screening of Hot Spots using Additional Promotion Criteria Industrial Sector
|
# |
Industry/Site |
М1. Annual Mass Loading |
М2. Annual Hydraulic Loading |
|
|
BOD, % of the Basin total |
Nitrogen, % of the Basin total |
% of the Basin total |
||
|
1 |
Zaporizhstal Metallurgical Plant |
1.19 |
5.03 |
1.580 |
|
2 |
KrivorozhStal Steel Plant (Krivy Rig) |
2.52 |
3.94 |
1.000 |
|
3 |
Dzerzhinsky Metallurgical Plant (Dniprodzerzhinsk) |
0.32 |
0.35 |
2.470 |
|
4 |
Rivne Nuclear Power Station (Kuznetsоvsk) |
0.81 |
1.51 |
0.400 |
|
5 |
Southern Pipework Plant (Nikopol) |
1.40 |
0.30 |
0.620 |
|
6 |
Petrovsky Metallurgical Plant (Dnipropetrovsk) |
0.76 |
0.30 |
1.700 |
None of remaining municipal utilities and industries met the promotion criteria, expressed as 1% of the total annual ‘watershed’ load.
In order to identify the major polluting sources in the municipal sector, the pre-selected utilities were ranked not only in terms of organic (BOD) and nitrogen load, but also by their contribution to the total heavy metal load. The same approach was also applied to the industrial sector, where pre-selected industries were promoted on the basis of the organic (BOD), nitrogen and heavy metal load. Results of this analysis for the industrial sector are presented in Annex A (Tables A.4–А.10).
The results of ranking exercise using the above criteria indicate that nearly all industries meeting the additional promotion criteria were initially included in the list of top 100 Hot Spots yielding the highest ‘effective mass of contaminant’ (Table 4.3).
Table 4.3 : Spots Yielding the Highest Values of ‘Effective Mass of Contaminant’ (Мх) based on 2000 Reporting Data
|
# |
Industry/Site |
Mx, |
|
1 |
Kyiv Vodokanal Company |
15802.3 |
|
2 |
Dnipropetrovsk Water Utility |
9466.1 |
|
3 |
KrivorozhStal Steel Plant in Krivy Rig |
3467.1 |
|
4 |
Korotchenko Mine of the “SelidovUgol” Coal-Mining Company in Selidovo |
3201.6 |
|
5 |
Zaporizhstal Metallurgical Plant |
3184.7 |
|
6 |
Lutsk Vodokanal Utility |
2347.89 |
|
7 |
Zaporizhzhia Vodokanal Company |
2054.1 |
|
8 |
Krivy Rig Water Utility |
2040.4 |
|
9 |
Chernigiv Vodokanal Company |
1674 |
|
10 |
Dzerzhinsky Metallurgical Plant in Dniprodzerzhinsk |
999 |
|
11 |
“PavlogradUgol” Coal-Mining Company Water Utility in Pavlograd |
894.3 |
|
12 |
Zhitomyr Water Utility |
875.7 |
|
13 |
Southern Pipework Plant in Nikopol |
860.2 |
|
14 |
Kyiv Fish-processing Plant in Yagotin |
754.8 |
|
15 |
Sumy Vodokanal Company |
599.4 |
|
16 |
Dniprodzerzhinsk Water Utility |
593.6 |
|
17 |
Krivy Rig Thermal Power Plant #2 in Zelenodolsk |
558.2 |
|
18 |
Abakumov Mine of the “DonetskUgol” Coal-Mining Company in Donetsk |
505.3 |
|
19 |
Motovilovo Woodworking Company |
502.4 |
|
20 |
Petrovsky Metallurgical Plant in Dnipropetrovsk |
424.3 |
|
21 |
Shevchenko Collective Farm in Kyiv-Svyatoshin District |
379.8 |
|
22 |
Rivne Nuclear Power Station (Kuznetsоvsk) |
359.4 |
|
23 |
Bogun Training/Resort Complex in Boyarka |
356.2 |
|
24 |
Poltava Ore-Enrichment Plant |
309.4 |
|
25 |
Chelyuskintsy Mine of the “DonUgol” Coal-Mining Company in Donetsk |
297.1 |
|
26 |
Konotop Water Utility |
293.4 |
|
27 |
Pereyaslav Bakery |
260.1 |
|
28 |
Kurakhovsky Mine of the “SelidovUgol” Coal-Mining Company in Gornyak |
242.7 |
|
29 |
ATP-13262 Transportation Company in Brovary |
239.4 |
|
30 |
Stavishchansky Gas-Compressor Station in Boguslav District |
229.2 |
|
31 |
Agro-Construction Company (Kozin Village, Obukhiv District) |
202.9 |
|
32 |
Rossia Mine of the “SelidovUgol” Coal-Mining Company in Novogradovka |
197.2 |
|
33 |
Novogradovka Mine #2 |
190.3 |
|
34 |
Kapitanovka Road-Management Company #638 in the Kyiv-Svyatoshin District |
186.6 |
|
35 |
Coca-Cola Beverage Ukraine Plant in Brovary District |
174.7 |
|
36 |
Pervomaisk “KhimProm” Chemical Plant |
155.2 |
|
37 |
Zaporizhzhia Aluminium Plant |
134.8 |
|
38 |
Alexandria Water Utility |
125.8 |
|
39 |
Frunze Machine-Building Plant/Chemical Equipment Manufacture (Sumy) |
120.2 |
|
40 |
Morozovsky Quarry in Alexandria |
103.3 |
|
41 |
Kherson Water Utility |
101.1 |
|
42 |
Lubny Felt Factory |
100.2 |
|
43 |
Skvira Fishery Management Company, Velikopolovetskoe village, Skvirsky District |
94.5 |
|
44 |
Kremenchug Combined Heat Power Plant |
88.7 |
|
45 |
Brovary “Metakon” Plant |
84.5 |
|
46 |
Brovary Transportation Company #2 |
84.4 |
|
47 |
Svetlovodsk Water Utility |
83.2 |
|
48 |
Brovary Transportation Company #1063 |
82.2 |
|
49 |
Bandurovsky Quarry in Alexandria |
81.3 |
|
50 |
“KhimProm” Chemical Plant in Sumy |
81.2 |
|
51 |
Karlovka Machine-Building Plant |
81.1 |
|
52 |
Romny Water Utility |
78.1 |
|
53 |
Kostopol Vodokanal Company |
74.8 |
|
54 |
"Euro-Foods GmbH Ukraine" in Brovary |
73.5 |
|
55 |
Lubny Water Utility |
71.6 |
|
56 |
“Svema” Plant in Shostka |
71.3 |
|
57 |
Leninsky Komsomol Mine in Alexandria |
69.9 |
|
58 |
Bereznovsky Water Utility “Kommunalnik” |
63.1 |
|
59 |
Alexandria Combined Heat Power Plant 1&2 |
62.7 |
|
60 |
Military Base AO 981 at Tsibulevo |
60.9 |
|
61 |
Belopolsk Machine-Building Plant |
58.1 |
|
62 |
Znamenka Water Utility |
55.5 |
|
63 |
Alexandria Combined Heat Power Plant #3 |
45.6 |
|
64 |
Mirgorod Water Utility |
44 |
|
65 |
"Quartz" Quarry Management Company in Kremenchug |
42.7 |
|
66 |
Varva Water Utility |
42.6 |
|
67 |
Selishchansky Granite Quarry in Sarny District |
41.1 |
|
68 |
Radekhov District Municipal Utility |
39.9 |
|
69 |
Alexandrovka Municipal Utility |
37.8 |



