No doubt at great cost, none of which is being factored into current nuclear projects or energy pricing. So, this is as unlikely to happen as it has been in the past 8 decades. The size of the problem just keeps on growing every year while we don't lift a finger to address the issues.
Long term storage is more of an aspirational thing at this point than a concretely actionable thing. Only a small minority of all nuclear waste ever produced actually sits in long term storage. E.g. the Fins have taken into use an underground facility recently. But most nuclear waste elsewhere sits in temporary storage waiting to eventually be moved. Nobody wants to pay for that. Nobody wants this stuff in their backyard. Nobody really wants to even talk about the cost. Which is of course substantial. Especially people in favor of building more nuclear capacity to add to this problem.
Somebody (i.e. future generations of tax payers, for millennia to come) will pay for it. Eventually. Which is convenient because we can pretend things are cheap short term.