What if the future of clean, sustainable energy was locked inside something we’ve mislabeled for decades as “waste”? It sounds implausible, but this is precisely the branding dilemma facing the nuclear energy industry. Since 1955, spent nuclear fuel (SNF) – a material rich with potential for reuse and innovation – has been burdened by the misleading and damaging term “waste.” That single word has done more to erode public trust and stall progress than any technical hurdle the industry has ever faced.
Here’s the engineering reality: SNF is far from waste. It’s a high-value resource containing fissile materials like uranium and plutonium that can power advanced reactors. It also holds immense energy potential that emerging technologies can unlock. Yet, as long as we continue calling it “waste,” we obscure its value, hinder technological advancement, and fuel public resistance.
It’s time to change the narrative. By rebranding SNF as High-Level Product (HLP), instead of High-Level Waste (HLW) we align its identity with its true potential, transforming how it is perceived and managed. This shift isn’t just semantics; it’s a global imperative. The need for clean, reliable, zero-emissions energy has never been greater, with rising energy demands from industrial sectors, including AI, data centres, and manufacturing, relying on stable, high-baseload power that nuclear delivers.
For engineers, the opportunity is clear: this is a challenge where innovation and ingenuity can drive transformative change. SNF can be securely stored, safely managed, and kept retrievable for future use. Rebranding it as HLP opens the door for further advancements in reprocessing technologies and reactor designs, reinforcing nuclear energy’s role as a cornerstone of a sustainable energy future.
Don’t call it waste: Reframing the spent nuclear fuel nomenclature
The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s 1955 decision created a term that has ever since shaped public perception of nuclear energy. This misnomer has fed misconceptions, fueling resistance to nuclear energy and hindering its development. In truth, SNF is a valuable material with untapped potential, far from the harmful, useless “waste” the term implies.
To advance nuclear energy as a clean, reliable, zero-emissions power source, we must rethink how we describe SNF. Rebranding it as a “high-level product” (HLP) could shift public perception, reduce opposition, and unlock the potential of this misunderstood resource.
Lessons for spent nuclear fuel rebranding
The power of language in shaping public perception can have profound impacts. An example comes from the shift from “Global Warming” to “Climate Change” which has arguably created the most significant shift in public opinion and widespread acceptance for several reasons. Initially, the term “global warming” dominated discussions about environmental issues. The term “global warming” was criticized for being overly simplistic and even misleading during periods of temporary cooling or extreme winters. It created a perception of a singular phenomenon – rising temperatures – rather than the broader set of impacts, including extreme weather and sea-level rise.
The term “climate change” was introduced to reflect the more comprehensive and nuanced nature of the issue by including a wider range of phenomena such as rising temperatures, extreme weather events, melting ice caps, and sea-level rise. Climate change also helped neutralise skepticism by focusing on variability and long-term patterns rather than short-term anomalies.
The shift in terminology allowed scientists, policymakers, and activists to frame the issue as a systemic challenge rather than a singular event. This broader scope made the issue more relatable and urgent for diverse audiences around the world, as people experience various manifestations of climate change directly. The widespread adoption of “climate change” by governments, media, and educational institutions normalised discussions about the issue and helped gain broader acceptance in public and political discourse, focusing attention on the complexity of environmental challenges rather than just temperature increases.
It subsequently made it easier to link human activity, such as carbon emissions, to wide-ranging impacts, leading to a more unified global effort and paving the way for international agreements like the Paris Climate Accord.
The rebranding to “climate change” not only shifted public opinion but also catalyzed tangible actions at global and local levels. The term has become central to conversations about sustainability, energy policy, and environmental justice. It changed the way individuals, industries, and governments approach environmental challenges, making it a landmark case in the power of rebranding to influence perception and drive collective action.
A similar development has taken place in another area of waste management. Historically, waste disposal sites were referred to as “garbage dumps,” evoking images of chaos, filth, and uncontrolled hazards. With advancements in waste management technology, the term “sanitary landfill” was introduced. This rebranding highlighted controlled waste disposal practices, safety measures, and environmental regulations, helping communities perceive landfills as necessary and managed facilities rather than uncontrolled eyesores. It also facilitated discussions about recycling and waste-to-energy solutions.
This type of seismic change can be possible with the change in spent nuclear fuel terminology. By rebranding spent nuclear fuel from “high-level waste” (HLW) to “high-level product” (HLP), we can emphasise its value, safety, and potential for reuse, much like other successful rebranding efforts have shifted perceptions in their respective domains.
Misunderstanding spent nuclear fuel
Spent fuel is produced when nuclear fuel assemblies become less efficient for energy generation and are replaced. While no longer suitable for reactors, SNF retains valuable materials like uranium and plutonium that can be reprocessed and reused. It also contains significant energy potential, making it a resource rather than a liability.
Unfortunately, labeling SNF as “waste” dismisses this potential and stokes fear. The term implies toxicity and harm, feeding the “Not in My Backyard” (NIMBY) phenomenon and making communities resistant to hosting storage facilities. This resistance has stalled progress on long-term storage solutions, even as scientific advancements have made these solutions safe and reliable.
One promising approach to managing SNF is deep horizontal wellbore storage. These geological repositories drilled more than 10,000 feet (3048 m) underground, provide a stable, secure environment for long-term storage. The geology at these depths has been stable for millions of years, and the surrounding rock effectively contains radiation forever. Encapsulation technologies, such as copper or titanium canisters, ensure safety and retrievability.
Deep wellbore storage allows SNF to remain accessible for future use. Advanced reactor designs and reprocessing technologies could extract additional value from SNF, supporting a circular economy for nuclear materials. Recognising SNF as a product, not waste, underscores its potential as a resource for future energy systems.
The power of language
As the world seeks solutions to the climate crisis, nuclear energy offers a compelling case. It produces no greenhouse gas emissions during operation, complements renewable sources, and provides reliable, scalable power. Yet public resistance, fueled by misconceptions about SNF, has limited its expansion.
Rebranding SNF as HLP could change this narrative. Highlighting its value and safe management could reduce opposition, build public trust, and position nuclear energy as a critical component of a sustainable energy future.
Language shapes perception. The term “waste” has created a psychological barrier to public acceptance of nuclear energy, while “high-level product” highlights SNF’s potential as a resource. This change needs to occur at all levels:
Policy: Agencies like the NRC and Department of Energy should adopt “high-level product” in official documents to signal a shift in how SNF is viewed.
Education: Teaching students and the public about SNF’s value can foster understanding and acceptance of nuclear energy.
Media: Journalists and content creators should emphasise success stories and innovative solutions for managing SNF, countering fear-based narratives.
A new path forward
Reframing SNF as HLP is more than a semantic change, it’s a strategic shift that reflects its true nature. By changing the way we talk about SNF, we can reduce public resistance, encourage innovation, and support the expansion of nuclear energy.
In the effort to minimise harmful emissions and control future climate change, nuclear power’s potential must not be overshadowed by outdated terminology. The world’s energy future depends on engineers rising to meet this moment. By reframing how we talk about and approach spent nuclear fuel, we can overcome the entrenched stigma, advance public trust, and unlock a powerful resource for future generations. The time for action, and innovation, is now. Let’s lead the charge. Don’t call it waste, call it what it is: a resource for the future.
