The earlier studies show that there is visible suspicion towards nuclear waste. Today, less than a third (32%) of the respondents consider that the disposal of nuclear waste in Finnish bedrock is safe. Sceptics are more numerous, nearly half (46%) of the population. The figures are slightly less sceptical than the year before, but almost the same as those two years ago, and close to the mean value of the last ten years. The stability in these figures shows that the attitudes toward nuclear waste are not directly connected to the support of nuclear power in general. During the first ten years of the follow-up period (1983-1993), confidence was, however, slightly weaker than now [Figure 7].

The reservations can be partly explained by the fact that two-thirds (68%) of the respondents consider nuclear waste to be a continuous threat to the life of future generations. Only about one in seven (15%) disagree. In light of this part of the survey, the concern regarding nuclear waste is practically at the same level as in the previous year, which is slightly below the usual level. The trend in the attitudes throughout the study period indicates that the ideas pertaining to the threat are persistent; no major mitigation has been seen in attitudes during the 25 study years [Figure 8].

More than two out of five (45%) now accept the notion that it would be better to keep nuclear waste in its present intermediate storage and wait for new solutions rather than to definitively deposit it in the bedrock. Approximately one in five disagree (21%). The support of such a 'time for thinking' has not changed much from the last survey, but it has clearly decreased during the follow-up period. The overall change in this direction from the beginning of the 1990's (62% supported intermediate storage in 1991) is great. However, interpretation should be made considering the decision made in 1994 to prohibit the export of nuclear waste, which restricted the potential range of decisions (no figure).

Attitudes towards nuclear waste are, on average, less negative in the communities where the existing nuclear power plants are located than they are in the rest of Finland. Confidence in safe disposal is significantly more widespread in these communities. The results of the earlier surveys should also be kept in mind when studying this trend. They have continuously shown that in principle, the residents of both Eurajoki and Loviisa are prepared to accept the disposal of nuclear waste in the area of their own municipality. The changes in attitudes in these municipalities are slightly different this time from previous surveys. The attitude towards nuclear waste in Eurajoki is more or less the same as in the two previous surveys, but the residents of Loviisa are slightly more suspicious. In the past few years, the difference between the power plant municipalities and the rest of the country has decreased rather than increased (no figure).