- The public is exposed to greater danger due to relocation.
Every time you move this stuff there's a chance for a vehicular accident or just a storage breach due to human and/or manufacturing error.
Whatever happened to vitrification as a solution for some classes of nuclear waste? That was the story for one hot second and I haven't heard about it since.
You have to assess these risks against the risk of living in New Jersey with a basement.
If it becomes cheaper to re-use or recycle than to throw away—in theory—we will reduce wastefulness and come up with better ways to deal with our problem.
But, humans being humans, some will start dumping illegally.
- End-of-life storage requires re-storage regardless of whether better technologies exist
- Spillage is more likely to occur due to more frequent handling/repackaging/relocation
- Workers are exposed to greater danger due to more frequent handling/repacking/relocation
- Overhead is greater since there will likely be a greater number of short term than long term storage facilities
- Accidents are more likely and more spread out over a larger area (assumption: short term storage requires more space than long term storage)