Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

150 acres of dreams dashed: Buyer now sought for super-collider site
Houston Chronicle ^ | March 15, 2003 | Jim Henderson

Posted on 03/15/2003 10:48:51 PM PST by ItsJeff

150 acres of dreams dashed
Buyer now sought for super-collider site
By JIM HENDERSON
Copyright 2003 Houston Chronicle

WAXAHACHIE -- The historical footnote will record that it was the most expensive dry hole ever drilled: 18 miles, $2 billion.

It was a cursed quest not for oil or gold or any other tangible resource, but for a brief glimpse -- through a window measured in billionths of a second -- at the creation of the universe.

It touched off a frenzy of land speculation, ignited delusions of quick wealth and long-term prosperity, inspired visions of this placid, North Texas prairie town, best known for its gingerbread homes and ornate courthouse, turned into a hub of international scientific commotion.

That was then. Now, a decade after Congress pulled the plug, what was to have been a superconducting super collider, capable of smashing atoms at near the speed of light, is just a plugged hole, seven drab buildings of assorted sizes and 150 acres of dashed dreams.

Ellis County officials would like to sell it and put the debacle behind them, but while potential buyers drop in occasionally, they have never been able to close the deal.

"It's pretty much a single-use facility," says Ellis County Attorney Joe Grubbs, who handles the legal work of disposing of the property. "One building is 28 feet wide and 600 feet long and it curves. There are not a lot of uses for that building. You couldn't even use it for a shooting range."

The county thought it was close to unloading the white elephant a few weeks ago. A Dallas businessman entered into serious negotiations to acquire the buildings and convert them into an antiterrorism training camp.

Like others before it, that deal fell through. The buildings, which were built to operate what was touted as one of history's grandest scientific experiments, are now near-deserted warehouses. Some county office furniture is stored in one. Mountains of boxes containing plastic foam food containers fill another.

"Everybody gets excited when somebody looks at it," Grubbs says of the property, "and then they are disappointed when a sale isn't made. After a few times, you get a little jaded."

After Congress killed funding for the program in 1993, the Department of Energy ceded nearly 10,000 acres to the state, which sold some of it to private individuals and parceled out some to the county and local school districts.

Rent from companies using the buildings for storage and for television commercial and movie production have helped defray the costs.

"It pays for itself," says County Judge Chad Adams, who took office early this year.

Still, the county is eager to unload the bland, brown buildings that are a dreary monument to what one scholar called a "super boondoggle."

"The SSC promises to do little more than provide permanent employment for hundreds of high-energy particle physicists and transfer wealth to Texas," Kent Jeffreys, director of environmental studies at the Competitive Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., wrote in the spring of 1992.

Enthusiastically advocated by the Reagan administration -- including then-Vice President George Bush -- and embraced by Congress in the early 1980s, the super collider was designed to be a 54-mile elliptical tunnel lined with 11,000 superconducting magnets that would hurl atoms on a collision course for a small-scale replication of the Big Bang.

It would employ nearly 2,500 scientists and technicians and would cost what seemed like an affordable $5 billion. The Energy Department promised that other nations would gladly contribute to the cost for their scientists to have access to the facility.

Twenty-six states engaged in fierce bidding for the colossus, but passions in Washington cooled as the decade came to a close. The scientific community was divided over the value of the collider, and when Texas was chosen for the site, regional resentments surfaced.

"Politics is what killed it," says Keith Roberts, the Ellis County property manager.

Holly Davis, an assistant to the county judge, agrees.

"The government said, `Wait, this is Texas. You've got NASA and the collider. You guys have to choose,' " she says.

More likely what killed it was the debate over the scientific value and the cost.

By the time President George Bush signed the first appropriations bill for the collider in 1989, the estimated cost was approaching $8 billion, with no guarantees it wouldn't go higher.

And, that was a time when the country was facing tough choices. During the 1980s, the national debt soared higher than a space lab, and interest payments alone devoured a quarter of annual federal outlays.

Defending such a massive and controversial project, which promised little practical return, was becoming difficult, especially for Bush, who would soon have to renege on his "read my lips" pledge and go along with a tax increase.

Still, work proceeded in Ellis County. Scientists began moving in. Land was acquired, and work on the tunnel started. Land values shot up, and businesses jockeyed for a bite of the golden egg.

But there were a few skeptics.

"There was a lot of hope," says Susie Witcher, who works in an antique shop in Waxahachie. "But some of us thought it was going to be a fiasco, that we were going to get screwed. It was just too good to be true. I couldn't understand why they would put it here anyway. We're the fire ant capital of the world. Those things can get into a bank vault."

Feelings also were mixed in the community of Boz (population 200), just southwest of Waxahachie, where houses and farms and ranches were being acquired for the project.

The village vanished. Most residents went willingly, having exacted generous prices for their land.

Monnie Bratcher, eightysomething, became a local legend and is still talked about, several years after her death, when conversation turns to the collider.

She had a small farm where she had lived for 80 years. She had 17 cattle, fences, a barn and was close to the cemetery where her parents were buried.

"She wanted to die in her house," says Witcher. "She told them they would have to physically move her off her land, and they did."

Lon Robert Wakefield, who surrendered most of his 140-acre cattle ranch to the Department of Energy, also remembers Bratcher's last stand.

"The sheriff came out and moved her," he says. "She told them they were never going to finish it (the collider) and she was staying right there."

She was the last to go. Less than two years later, the project, 20 percent complete, was halted.

"There was some bitterness about losing their land," Wakefield says. "But most who went through this are dead and gone now."

After he sold his land, Wakefield, now 71, moved into town for a few years. He then returned to the country to settle on six acres, something less than a ranch.

He had a chance to buy back the land he lost, but he declined.

"Everything was gone ... the fences, the barns. I would have had to start all over," he says. "I'm too old for that."

Adams, the county judge, says local residents have recovered from the disappointment of the project's demise but would like to see the facility sold and put to profitable use.

Tentative offers for the property have ranged from $3 million to $8.5 million -- paltry sums in the scheme of what was planned here.

Still, most residents believe, anything would be better than storing plastic foam cups in a $2 billion warehouse.

"It needs to be used for something," Wakefield says.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: crevolist; government; science; stringtheory; waste
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 next last
To: merak
Just curious: why did you click on my screen name?
21 posted on 03/16/2003 8:03:01 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Two words: defense budget.

Oh, yeah.

22 posted on 03/16/2003 8:46:43 AM PST by ItsJeff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
You have clearly been brainwashed by the academy. I'm surprised that you are even conservative, given the left-wing biases of virtually all discplines (check on research from the Hoover Institute to back my claims).

All of the basic Internet protocols existed in commercial form from vendors such as IBM and Wang long before they were ever standardized on the Internet. We would probably have a more robust Internet if we had to communicate between robust protocols rather than relying on a common inplementation of TCP/IP.

It was a fait accompli that all these networked computers would want to communicate with each other. You may not be aware that Netscape was threatened with a legal shutdown because they had supposedly relied on the "open source" of the NCSA Mosaic browser.

I have never seen an academic or government lab run with any sense of efficiency or purpose. They are all hegemons intending to enrich their chiefs. I can't tell you of how many people have had their work stolen or forced to accept non-existent co-authors because of this reality.

The work of Bell Labs IBM labs, and probably soon from Microsoft, will and had been more important that what comes from academia. Neither Newton nor Einstein had labs, and Waston and Crick did no original research beyond stealing the X-Ray crystalography from their coworker and deriding her in print. Most of the great contributors to British science in the 19th century were men of commerce.

If you want to see what real phsycicists can do with mind power alone and outside of the academy, I recommend you attend the "Storrs" (?) conference coming up soon, which is where truly innovative minds meet.
23 posted on 03/16/2003 9:44:10 AM PST by Fractal Trader (Put that MOAB where the sun doesn't shine, Saddam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
Gettin'-rich-on-public-largesse ping.
24 posted on 03/16/2003 10:06:36 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Could you do the ping thing?
25 posted on 03/16/2003 10:07:03 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro; jennyp; Junior; longshadow; *crevo_list; RadioAstronomer; Scully; Piltdown_Woman; ...
Ping thing.

[This ping list is for the evolution -- not creationism -- side of evolution threads, and sometimes for other science topics. To be added (or dropped), let me know via freepmail.]

26 posted on 03/16/2003 11:34:16 AM PST by PatrickHenry (The universe is made for life, therefore ID. Life can't arise naturally, therefore ID.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ItsJeff
I still have my Supercollider hat. Got it for working on the project.
27 posted on 03/16/2003 11:37:59 AM PST by RightWhale (Theorems link concepts: Proofs establish links)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Killing the SSC was, in my mind, like our retreat from the Moon. Two giant steps backwards. At least we have the Hubble. Who knows what other worthy projects the geniuses in Congress will kill, to save pennies, while they spend hundreds of billions every year on various welfare programs -- all money down the drain forever.
28 posted on 03/16/2003 11:53:43 AM PST by PatrickHenry (The universe is made for life, therefore ID. Life can't arise naturally, therefore ID.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
What bothers me is that the research is important, and we've irresponsibly ceded it to other countries and centuries. But I'm afraid the national opinion is dominated by people who believe that, "The SSC promises to do little more than provide permanent employment for hundreds of high-energy particle physicists and transfer wealth to Texas", which slams the door on the notion that the research has any value at all.

Yes it is important. As I remember it was shut down during the Clinton administration because Texans had the nerve to elect a second Republican Senator for the state. I have never heard of it not being useful for scientific research.

29 posted on 03/16/2003 12:09:18 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
I should add that many of the dollars now being spend by the U.S. on high energy physics are directed at experiments and laboratories in Europe. They have the equipment, and we don't.

This brain-drain, coupled with our incredibly lousy public school system, should just about level the playing field - the goal of every true liberal. For instead of being the leader in science and technology, we will now be consigned to a Third-World position.

Perhaps Europe and China will take pity on us in years to come and send us their old, out-of-date equipment.

30 posted on 03/16/2003 12:23:42 PM PST by Aracelis (Oh, evolve!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
Hey RA, maybe we should buy this thing...instead of that other little bit of property we've had our eyes on. You're up for a little high-energy work, aren't you?
31 posted on 03/16/2003 12:27:34 PM PST by Aracelis (Oh, evolve!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Gettin'-rich-on-public-largesse ping.

I get the same arguments for my work with NASA and/or my radio telescope. :-(

If some had their way, all government labs and NASA would be scrapped. What they do not realize is that much of the wealth we enjoy and the technology we use (including our military) came out of those same government labs.

32 posted on 03/16/2003 12:32:38 PM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Piltdown_Woman
Hey RA, maybe we should buy this thing...instead of that other little bit of property we've had our eyes on. You're up for a little high-energy work, aren't you?

LOL! I dont have 11 billion in my back pocket! :-(

33 posted on 03/16/2003 12:40:32 PM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
I dont have 11 billion in my back pocket!

Is that all? Hell, I'll take two...

:^)

34 posted on 03/16/2003 12:44:55 PM PST by general_re (Non serviam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
I still have my Supercollider hat. Got it for working on the project

Well I didn't think you got it for ordering a Happy Meal...

: )

35 posted on 03/16/2003 1:13:42 PM PST by ItsJeff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
What they do not realize is that much of the wealth we enjoy and the technology we use (including our military) came out of those same government labs.

Yes, but it's a bit of a problem, with them controling the research funding. If we weren't taxed so brutally, corporations could easily afford the basic research -- if only for the public relations benefits. Instead, the commie feds drain us of our resources [and our precious bodily fluids!], and then they dole out the funding for projects they deem worthy. Far better to slash the federal budget in half (at least!), slash our taxes in half (as a starter!), and then let the research get done privately.

36 posted on 03/16/2003 2:19:39 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Just curious: why did you click on my screen name?

Curiosity, mainly as to the lack of any sort of an adjective along with the word "physicist".

37 posted on 03/16/2003 3:28:29 PM PST by merak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Far better to slash the federal budget in half (at least!), slash our taxes in half (as a starter!), and then let the research get done privately.

Here here!! Question: Would something like the supercollider get funded under such a regime? The real question probably would be, would anything practical or capable of gennerating revenue ever come of it?

38 posted on 03/16/2003 3:30:58 PM PST by merak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ijcr
Clinton Library?

THAT was hilarious! However, you off by about 599 feet, nine inches as far as necessary, uh, length.
39 posted on 03/16/2003 3:42:30 PM PST by 356SC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: merak
Would something like the supercollider get funded under such a regime?

We will never know what our country would have been like today if a few hundred billion a year in Great Society spending hadn't been taxed from us and wasted, every year for the last 35 years, but instead had been left in private hands to be invested in the free, private, productive economy. We'd probably have a gross national product at least ten times as large as now. Probably far larger, considering the small amount of actual investment in new companies that actually goes on each year (small compared to federal spending on social programs). But we'll never know, will we?

The real question probably would be, would anything practical or capable of gennerating revenue ever come of it?

We won't know that either. So much waste, so many opportunities lost. So many "might have beens" to wonder about.

40 posted on 03/16/2003 3:56:38 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson