[vidarh]

You don't need to be able to guarantee safe storage for 10,000+ years. For starters most of it can be reprocessed and reused, resulting in less dangerous waste. But no matter how reckless you decide to be with it, the amounts are small enough that it'll be nothing compared to the devastation caused by coal.

[glenneroo]

> For starters most of it can be reprocessed and reused...

Are any projects doing that or planning to? As far as I have read, it's still only a plausible theory but has yet to be implemented.

[vidarh]

It has been done since the 70's [1]. It has been banned in the US since '76 due to proliferation concerns. There are certainly challenges, but most of those challenges are down to stupid choices that were made in the 60's. Newer plants will continue to bring down the cost of using reprocessed fuel.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reprocessing

[mpweiher]

France has been reprocessing for decades. Other projects were stopped for largely political reasons. Waste disposal is a political problem.