rebutting some of this article:
In a comment that I have down below I list two companies (Sparton Resources of Canada and Wildhorse Energy. (5000-15000 tons of uranium per year from European flyash alone.)
http://www.wise-uranium.org/upeur.html#AJKA

Flyash is 160-180 parts per million uranium. 40 times better than granite.

Uranium mining info
http://www.wise-uranium.org/indexu.html#UMMCI

Uranium prices are substantially off of their peak
http://www.uxc.com/review/uxc_Prices.aspx

Only two thorium reactors in 2075 ? There is a project to make thorium fuel rods that can be used in most existing nuclear reactors. This seems likely to succeed in 3 years.
MIT Tecnology Review discusses the efforts to get thorium used in reactors for less waste (unburned fuel)

the Fuji Molten Salt Reactor (which could use thorium) seems to be 8-9 years from completion. The Fuji Molten salt reactor could burn 99.9% of the plutonium, uranium and thorium. So it would handle the waste issue and with profitable energy generation not some made up cost for waste handling.

The Hyperion power generation uranium hydride reactor scheduled for 2012 completion can also use thorium hydride A good hydride reactor design would burn 50% of the fuel instead of current 1-2% reducing fuel demand and leftover waste.

CANDU-type reactors - AECL is researching the thorium fuel cycle application to enhanced CANDU-6 and ACR-1000 reactors. With 5% plutonium (reactor grade) plus thorium high burn-up and low power costs are indicated. CANDU reactors can breed fuel from natural thorium, if uranium is unavailable.

The best way to get rid of the current and future waste is to build better reactors that burn all of the fuel and can generate electricity from existing waste.

The plan to use some expensive method to handle the unburned fuel is like saying if we used dollar bills for a nuclear waste incinerator it would cost a lot of money. Yes that would be expensive and an idiotic plan.