These hypothetical concerns ten thousand years into the future are absurd. The waste is buried hundreds of meters below ground, far from any useful resources. T

These hypothetical concerns ten thousand years into the future are absurd. The waste is buried hundreds of meters below ground, far from any useful resources. There is no warning signs or communications, the disposal sites are just made to be as nondescript as possible. Or the sites are in places already contaminated by nuclear weapons testing, so the concern of contamination is largely moot. So are we really going to block effectively unlimited non-intermittent carbon-free energy based on the concern that some future civilization might decide to dig deep in a remote location with no natural resources, and they might encounter a waste casket, and they might decide to open it. And they might do all of this without any knowledge of radiation poising. Yes, if all of those conditions are met, some poor sap thousands of years from now is going to get irradiated. I'm going to weight the positives of nuclear power way higher than the narrow chances of people being contaminated by waste. There are valid concerns over safety and costs of decommissioning, but those are limited to the operation of the plant itself and the disposal of the reactor (the pressure vessel). The waste management argument is very weak.