For instance "no nukes" think it is a scandal that we could spend $100 billion on Yucca mountain, but the average nuclear plant makes about $500 million per year in electricity so that is about 2 years of energy production. It's significant, but it's not crazy.
A reprocessing cycle could easily take a century to fully burn U238 so "what it costs" is influenced by what you think interest rates will be (or should) be for next 100 years.
Fuel cycle costs are nearly zero compared to the cost of the steam turbine at an LWR. If the price of uranium tripled, it would make little different in the basebar price of electricity.
And nope, given reprocessing, breeding, Thorium, and Uranium extraction from seawater, we're not going to run out of nuclear fuel for tens of thousands of years, if ever.
In which case why are a number of other proponents in this thread suggesting the best solution is to bury it?