To have or not to have, that’s the dilemma

Please pardon my use of the Adapted line from Hamlet, but thought that he was very appropriate in this case.

First of all, I would like to declare that there might be some conflict of interest: I work in the Nuclear Medicine industry, which uses radioactive isotopes for the diagnosis and treatment of diseases. Canada is one of the biggest producers of medical isotopes in the world, since the CANDU reactors were invented in our country. Usually, nuclear reactor, typically at an older facility, is repurposed from energy production to that of medical isotopes.

Now to speak to the matter at hand: The debate weather nuclear energy should exist, or not, I think has been exhaustively discussed and settled. Alas, one of the aspects of nuclear energy is the waste that it produces, which is very difficult to manage. One of the best solutions is to bury the fuel rods,deep underground, as the layers of soil will act as protective shields from the radiation that is emitted. 

Therefore, as a country, as a community, we need to come to an agreement as to where to store the spent fuel rods. Whether this location is ideal or not, that is a very difficult decision to make. Unfortunateky, we don't have the technology to disposal them in a more acceptable or effective time

Usually, these radioactive materials are stored in a location where it will have the minimal and lowest impact to humans, wildlife, and nature. However, they do need to be stored somewhere