First world problems.

@Fast-Nop Of course nuclear waste isn't created during construction and I didn't say it was. I said it is a problem of scale. We need to build facilities to store waste with all the engineering it requires. Each year that goes by actually adds little required space and to the challenge. It's a scaling issue vs time. It is practically the same problem to store 1 container for 100.000 years than storing 100 containers for 100.000 years. The problem is the 100.000 years problem is already with us. That's why I also see nuclear waste as a sunken cost we get from the moment we start the reactor. Look for Sabine Hossenfelder's YouTube video on nuclear waste. She is the real physicist and explains this much better than I ever could. In the meanwhile, we've been reactivating coal plants 🤦‍♂️

@Fast-Nop Waste is a factor before building a reactor, but its scale would have changed very little by keeping existing plants running for another decade or two. The waste is a good argument against building new plants, but it is an incredibly foolish one for prematurely terminating existing running plants that have given energy security without the most urgent waste we need to get rid of, carbon. As for TCO, since the greatest cost is the initial investment, stopping milking the cow after the biggest chunk of money has been spent is completely irrational. Having that said, your argument is valid for not building new nuclear capacity and spending the money on renewable energy instead.