Hazardous waste in Ukraine: where, by whom and how the most toxic substances are generated

As the economy undergoes rapid transformation and expectations of corporate environmental responsibility grow, waste management — especially of hazardous waste — is becoming central to ESG approaches. However, the real level of environmental risk largely remains non-public or is only partially visible in the public domain.

The team of the NGO “Open Data Association” and the YouControl R&D Centre conducted a study to identify in detail which regions of Ukraine account for the largest volumes of hazardous waste, which industries form a critical share of this burden, and which companies were the main sources of such waste in 2024.

The article is based on a comprehensive analysis of official data, complemented by visualisation of spatial and sectoral trends. It also attempts to assess how ready Ukraine’s corporate sector is to implement environmentally responsible practices in hazardous waste management — and what this means within ESG approaches.

The geography of hazardous waste

In 2024, legal entities in Ukraine generated more than 592,000 tonnes of hazardous waste. However, these volumes are distributed extremely unevenly: some regions account for tens of percent of the entire toxic mass, while others remain almost “clean” blank spots in official statistics.

The absolute leader in hazardous waste generation was Zaporizhzhia region — 184,000 tonnes, or more than 31% of the national total. The main factors here are the concentration of heavy industry, in particular metallurgical and chemical production, as well as the energy sector, which traditionally generates the largest volumes of hazardous industrial sludge and other class I–II hazardous waste.

Second place goes to the city of Kyiv with more than 61,000 tonnes. The capital is formally home not only to large industrial complexes but also to logistics, medical, construction and service companies, which are also sources of toxic substances.

The top five most burdened regions also include:

• Lviv region — 53,800 tonnes;
• Dnipropetrovsk region — 52,000 tonnes;
• and Volyn region — 37,100 tonnes.

For Lviv and Volyn regions, the high figures are partly explained by the coal industry, processing enterprises and the active development of production using secondary raw materials, where hazardous waste is an unavoidable by-product.

At the opposite end of the regional ranking are Donetsk (39 tonnes), Kherson (11 tonnes) and Luhansk (7 tonnes) regions. Here, the low figures are due to the full-scale war, de-occupation of territories or temporary loss of control over them, which makes it impossible to keep accurate statistical records of the full volumes of waste generated.

The uneven generation of hazardous waste is a challenge for environmental policy, as its regional distribution points to several key trends:

• The toxic burden is concentrated in industrial regions with a large share of processing industry.
• Data on waste generation may be understated or missing in combat zones, which distorts the overall picture.
• A large share of waste is generated not only by traditional “heavy” industry but also by service sectors — logistics, healthcare and business services.

Implementing effective ESG strategies requires detailed zoning of regional environmental risks, a transparent system for recording the generation and disposal of hazardous waste, and a change in approaches to state and corporate oversight of sustainable development.

Which sectors generate the most hazardous waste in Ukraine?

Despite war-related risks and economic instability, Ukraine’s industrial and agricultural sectors continue to operate actively. This also means a steady generation of large volumes of hazardous waste — from chemically aggressive substances to biologically active components that can have a significant impact on the environment and human health.

The analytical review by YouControl shows how these volumes are distributed across sectors of the economy.

Non-metallic mining is the clear leader in hazardous waste generation, producing more than 201,000 tonnes — 34% of the total. This sector includes quarries extracting sand, crushed stone and clay, as well as mineral processing enterprises. Their waste typically contains heavy metals, abrasives and reagent residues that can pollute groundwater and air.

Healthcare facilities rank second, with 80,700 tonnes of hazardous waste coming from medical institutions. This figure has grown significantly since the pandemic and amid the hostilities. Medical waste includes infectious materials, expired medicines, ampoules, biological residues and other potentially hazardous substances that require special handling. A side effect of the healthcare system’s positive social impact on public health is therefore a toxic burden on the environment.

The agricultural sector, despite pollution that often goes unnoticed by the public, ranks third in total hazardous waste generated — 65,400 tonnes. Sources of toxic residues from agricultural enterprises include pesticides, herbicides, veterinary drugs and livestock waste. Despite its “natural” image, the agricultural sector is a serious source of chemical pressure that often escapes environmental oversight.

Other key sectors: food processing, coal mining, water supply, metallurgy and electronics manufacturing each generated between 25,000 and 40,000 tonnes of hazardous waste. These sectors share chemically active production cycles and limited environmental modernisation. In electronics manufacturing in particular, waste may contain cadmium, lead, arsenic and other extremely toxic elements.

ESG and corporate responsibility: a requirement of our time

High levels of hazardous waste generation across sectors point to the need for deeper integration of ESG principles into business operations. This is not only about accounting and reporting, but also about introducing closed production cycles, using safer technologies and developing infrastructure for disposal and recycling.

[note] Systematic work in these areas is the key to minimising environmental footprints and increasing companies’ long-term resilience.

[source] Analysis: Roman Kornyliuk, professor at KNEU, financial analyst at YouControl

[source] The material was prepared by the NGO “Open Data Association” in cooperation with the YouControl R&D Centre.