The only thing that will attract is terrorists. No matter how remote, "dirty bombs" are a real threat. And in densely populated Europe, we don't have the luxury of such places at all.
> Thanks to climate change, brought on in part by anti-nuclear activists
Sorry, what? Climate change has been brought on by fossil fuel companies:
- 20 companies are responsible for a third of all historic emissions: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/09/revealed...
- BP is the inventor of the "individual carbon footprint", inarguably one of the most devious PR campaigns that moved "responsibility" from the government to individual people so that the fossil fuel industry could make money without problems: https://mashable.com/feature/carbon-footprint-pr-campaign-sh...
- hotly contested, but fossil fuel companies may have had a hand in the decline of public transportation systems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp...
- not to mention the countless "donations", bribes and other lobbying efforts from the industry to politics over the last 50 years that made sure that cars were prioritized and emissions controls weakened (the latter only ended with the Dieselgate scandal).
All the nuclear waste of Europe could go in a building that's about one hectare. Yet there is enough place for both ten thousands of hectares of open pit coal mines, and hundreds of hectares of totally unprotected and open-air ash ponds containing toxic sludge that is guaranteed to more dangerous to your health - and sometimes also more radioactive - than just about any nuclear reactor waste.
Face it, the "Green" movement in Germany which has lobbied to replace nuclear power with wind/solar in the last decade (instead of replacing coal with renewables and nukes) are responsible for gigatons of carbon emissions and will be rightly vilified by future generations.
Sure we do. Stick it somewhere dry and remote. Thanks to climate change, brought on in part by anti-nuclear activists, we’ll have plenty of both well into the future.