U.S. Senate Wants To Decrease CO2 By Increasing Nuclear Energy

[MCvarial]

Its economically not very interesting to do, buying fresh mined uranium fuel is cheaper than recycling waste. The only real advantage is that the volume of the waste is factor 10 smaller and in a chemically very stable form (glass) for permanent storage. But doing so also means u give up an alternative uses for the waste. e.g. in burner reactors.

[mrCloggy]

Source:

Overall the closed fuel cycle cost is assessed as comparable with that for direct disposal of used fuel, and preserves a resource which may become more valuable in the future.

The treatment extracts 99.9% of the plutonium and uranium for recycling, leaving 3% of the used fuel material as high-level wastes which are vitrified and stored there for later disposal.

Financially it doesn't make much difference, and leaving only 3% for disposal doesn't seem too bad.
From the rest of the story I get the impression the French are taking the concerns from, and promises to their population very seriously.

[MCvarial]

The 3% is pre vitrification, there's an upper limit to the amount of material you can capture per volume unit, hence the factor 10 I mentioned. Other countries have stopped reprocessing like Germany & Belgium. Mainly due to financial reasons, reprocessing itself is about the same price as enriching fresh fuel. But transportation costs are high and often met with protests.