The idea that we have to solve the problem for 100,000 years has always seemed crazy to me. If we can store it for 100 years, we can be fairly confident that te

The idea that we have to solve the problem for 100,000 years has always seemed crazy to me. If we can store it for 100 years, we can be fairly confident that technology will have advanced to the point where then dealing with it for the remaining 99,900 years will be relatively trivial. If not, we hold on for 200 more years. 1700->2000 was quite a leap, and if 2000->2300 isn't enough that we can handle some nuclear waste by then, we've got bigger problems. We're merely hedging against the risk of catastrophic societal collapse causing us to lose track of the waste and lose our understanding of radiation. But this is the only area where we seem to give a hoot about the far future, which truly makes me think it's just a rationalization of "I don't like nuclear power", not a serious concern.