Weird, I haven't heard anything about this. However, as a Michigander, and one that lives in the east, so Lake Huron isn't too far, I support this. I trust it's far enough and that waste weak enough that it won't contaminate drinking water. It's a pretty deep mine, they're talking, and I don't really see how there's much worry it could contaminate the water, let alone to the point that it would make the water dangerous for people. It's a mile away from the shore, which might be short in driving distance, but when you think about how deep this stuff is, and how good water itself is at mitigating radiation it does come into contact with, I don't really understand the worry. Even if there is a leak, it would have to be pretty serious to actually reach the shore, and I trust if the company did make mistakes, there's enough safeguards in these systems that it would mitigate how much is leaked.

These reactors haven't been operating too far away, either, and they haven't managed to make our water undrinkable. And that's the stuff I'm really worried about, because that's where a meltdown is possible.

In any case, I don't think the site is all that odd, if you've read the article. It's near the reactor, they already own the land, and geologically, it's a very safe place to put it. I think they made their point very succinctly. And I feel it's pretty disingenuous to only quote them on their financial argument when they've had geological surveys, on top of the fact that the shorter the distance you transport radioactive materials over, the safer it is.