There's an opposite line of logic to the disposal of nuclear waste that projects such as these don't seriously consider:
Bury it in such a way that any hypothetical future primitive neo-civilisation can't detect it and can't dig it up - for better or for worse.
Instead of drawing attention to the dump of strange rocks that make neolithic humans sick, why not make it so unobtrusive that any enterprising future miners don't discover the waste dump in the first place?
We have the technology to survey geological formations for exploitable minerals. Why not instead survey for both the lack of exploitable minerals AND a long-term stable environment, then bury the small volume of high-reactivity waste that we've produced so far in a tiny shaft with a tortuous access route?
It's a lot easier to get humans to ignore something for 10,000 years than to make them pay attention to a warning sign.
Bury it in such a way that any hypothetical future primitive neo-civilisation can't detect it and can't dig it up - for better or for worse.
Instead of drawing attention to the dump of strange rocks that make neolithic humans sick, why not make it so unobtrusive that any enterprising future miners don't discover the waste dump in the first place?
We have the technology to survey geological formations for exploitable minerals. Why not instead survey for both the lack of exploitable minerals AND a long-term stable environment, then bury the small volume of high-reactivity waste that we've produced so far in a tiny shaft with a tortuous access route?
It's a lot easier to get humans to ignore something for 10,000 years than to make them pay attention to a warning sign.