Reprocess it, salvage useful isotopes for known uses, keep a few others for research purposes, don't put it too far away because most of it could be useful in the future.

Permanent underground storage where it will naturally decay. Are a couple of different methods available from what I understand. And the amount of material that actually needs to be stored is a fraction of what is instead released into the air, water & soil from fossil based fuel. Not to mention toxins like mercury etc.

We put it back in the ground where we found it in the first place.

I don't see how people are A-OK with uranium and other naturally occurring nuclear isotopes beneath their feet, but used fuel rods from a nuclear power plant? No fucking way!

Your house is full of radon Joe, the nuclear waste in a sealed casket, buried in the side of a mountain nowhere near you isn't what is going to give you cancer.

Eat it! So many calories. You will never have to eat again.

We have many. Most aren't in effect yet though, but it also isn't a serious issue. They're stored safely in cement caskets, with molten glass and stuff to keep it together and safe, with effectively zero chance to cause an issue. There are permanent ways to store it safely, but we haven't invested in them yet for many reason. Mostly, dirty energy companies pushing the anti-nuclear message have purposefully hamstrung nuclear from becoming a great solution, and people who think they're being smart believe them.

Is nuclear waste more radioactive than the uranium we started with?

Do we have a solution for atmospheric CO2 release yet?

Just put it back in the ground where it came from. Why is this a concern? It was radioactive rocks when we took it out, and it's radioactive rocks when we put it back in.

Do we have a problem with nuclear waste yet?

we give each yimby a few gallons to put in their closet