Table 1.

Comparison of emergency MW disposal technologies (Aerospace Shenhe (Beijing) Environmental Protection Co., 2020; Chen and Guo, 2020; China Building Materials Federation, 2020; Henan Liying Environmental Protection Technology Co. Ltd, 2020; Ministry of Ecology and Environment, 2020c; Zhou et al., 2020a; Han et al., 2018; Ministry of Environmental Protection, 2017; Yang, 2017; Wu et al., 2015).

Disposal facilities	Disposal capability (TPD)	Treatment temperature	Strengths	Weaknesses
Movable incineration equipment	1–5	800–1100 °C	•Can dispose of MW on site •Easy to install and operate •Small operation area •Can dispose of almost all kinds of MW	•Small disposal capacity •Risk of emissions easily exceed the standard due to immature technology
Movable steam sterilization cabin	2–5	>134 °C	•Can dispose of MW on site •Easy to install and operate •Small operation area •High automation degree	•Small disposal capacity •Not suitable for pharmaceutical MW and chemical MW
Movable microwave sterilization equipment	3–10	>95 °C	•Can dispose of MW on site •Easy to install and operate •Small operation area •High automation degree	•Small disposal capacity •Not suitable for pharmaceutical MW, chemical MW and partial pathological MW (human limbs and organs)
MSW incineration facility	30–100	>850 °C	•Large disposal capacity •Great potential in improving emergency disposal MW capability •Energy recovery by generating electricity	•High infection risk due to MW transportation •Need equipment upgrade and transformation to adapt to MW •Higher content of hydrogen chloride and dioxins in the flue gas •Higher operating costs •Shorter equipment life
Hazardous waste incineration facility	2–60	>850 °C	•Mature technology •Can dispose of almost all kinds of MW	•High infection risk due to MW transportation •Need equipment upgrade and transformation to adapt to MW •Small potential in improving emergency disposal MW capability due to the small amount of facilities •Higher content of dioxins in the flue gas
Cement kiln	1–12	>1000 °C	•Can be utilized as an alternative fuel •Large potential in improving emergency disposal MW capability	•High infection risk due to MW transportation •Need equipment upgrade and transformation to adapt to MW •Higher content of dioxins in the flue gas