The totality of the nuclear waste produced by France
in history can fit in a swimming pool, and most of the space is for the containers.
> It has to geologically stable for a long time.
Yep, we know places where natural nuclear waste have been stable for extremely long. Stability is not an issue.
> People 50,000 years from now need to understand your intentions
Sure, maybe some people may suffer from that in 50,000 years (if somehow they go dig there and lost trace of it, I suppose?). But you have to put it in perspective. Even if that killed millions of people (and you would have to look very far to invent a scenario that would be that bad with buried nuclear waste, but let's be very conservative here), that is still much, much better than killing billions in the next few decades with the alternatives.
Nuclear energy is not easy, it has to be taken seriously. But you have to realize that we are not talking about saving a few lives here. We are talking about the survival of most living species in a way that is not too bad for humans.
