[residentfoam]

Let's put aside Chernobyl, Fukushima and all the safety/economic/environment implications those incidents have had.

What about the nuclear waste ? How/where are we gonna store it ? And for how long is gonna be safe, before containers start leaking radioactive st into the environment ? Nobody wants to live anywhere near that st. That's a big problem.

[lemming]

Sustainable Energy Without The Hot Air (really excellent book, although a little dated now) discusses this:

https://www.withouthotair.com/c24/page_169.shtml

Thus waste storage engineers need to make a plan to secure high-level waste for about 1000 years. Is this a difficult problem? 1000 years is certainly a long time compared with the lifetimes of governments and countries! But the volumes are so small, I feel nuclear waste is only a minor worry, compared with all the other forms of waste we are inflicting on future generations. At 25 ml per year, a lifetime’s worth of high-level nuclear waste would amount to less than 2 litres. Even when we multiply by 60 million people, the lifetime volume of nuclear waste doesn’t sound unmanageable: 105 000 cubic metres. That’s the same volume as 35 olympic swimming pools. If this waste were put in a layer one metre deep, it would occupy just one tenth of a square kilometre.

[rurounijones]

in the US No one wants to live near the hidsiously environmentally unsafe fly ash tips from the 120'ish million tons produced yearly by coal power plants either https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fly_ash and they were told to get stuffed basically.

Waste storage is a technical non-issue (Yucca Mountain). It is a political one.

[holoduke]

We dump it in concrete barrels somewhere deep inside our planet's crust. In 1000 years from now we take it out and send it to the sun.