[hans1729]

The fact that your solution for long-term storage isn't even operational yet renders the confidence in your line of arguments ad absurdum. The fact that you try to defuse the GPs concerns with short-sentenced bullet points says it all - you're dismissive and strongly opinionated, while the concerned are asking very valid questions. That's bad intellectual culture, to say the least.

[Manuel_D]

Finland has operated the VLJ repository in Olkiluoto since the 1990s [1]. The linked facility is an additional one being constructed (also in Olkiluoto) to accommodate future waste.

There's also a site in Korea that's operational: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolseong_Low_and_Intermediat...

These examples are easily obtained via Google: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_geological_repository

The risks posed by nuclear waste is vastly overstated. A little known fact: the USSR and the United Kingdom dumped most of their nuclear waste into the ocean until the 1990s [2]. There were no adverse affects observed due to this dumping. Yet we're worried about waste buried in bedrock?

1. https://www.tvo.fi/en/index/production/nuclearwastemanagemen...

2. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_disposal_of_radioactiv...