WI: Particle Accelerator Complex constructed in Texas or California

[Datu Buwan]

So SSC Desertron was a planned project to construct a Particle Accelerator Complex in Texas during the 90s but did not go through because of budget problems. I was wondering if their is a possibility of a Complex to go through but instead of being funded by the government is funded by the private sector.

My idea was that capitalists, millionaires, entrepreneurs from Silicon Valley and elsewhere (E.G, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk etc.) restart the project to construct SSC Desertron in Texas between 2001 and 2016. If SSC Desertron is constructed between this year span what effects could it have on the state of Texas, science for the United States and anything else you can think of.

My other idea was if a Particle Accelerator Complex constructed in California instead of Texas. The idea is similar to the last paragraph. A constructed Particle Accelerator Complex between 2001 and 2016 funded by capitalists, millionaires, entrepreneurs from Silicon Valley but instead is located in California. If a complex were to be constructed in California how could it have an effect on California High Tech Industry, and how would it affect California, and science for the United States?

Thoughts?

 

[Emperor Norton I]

But magic science will kill us all, right?

 

[wietze]

this kind of constructions are very sensitive, so Cali with its many mini (and not so mini) quakes would be a very bad place to build something like that.
texas could, but should be away from fault lines , and best built near a location where a lot of cheap electricity is available

 

[Datu Buwan]

But magic science will kill us all, right?

Hmmm...

this kind of constructions are very sensitive, so Cali with its many mini (and not so mini) quakes would be a very bad place to build something like that.
texas could, but should be away from fault lines , and best built near a location where a lot of cheap electricity is available

I am not too sure about Texas as I am trying to find a reputable map showing Texas fault lines but could a Particle Accelerator Complex be powered by a Nuclear Power plant say for example Comanche Peak? Is it advisable for a complex to be powered by nuclear energy?

If one were to constructed in California, I imagine they would have to structurally build the complex to be earthquake resistant. I checked a list of dams and one of the 5 largest is Shasta Dam could provide power. I checked this map of the fault lines in the state so I wonder if complex could be built in Shasta.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

So, the SSC was going to cost something like 12B$? (Twice the cost of the LHC), and presumably then cost more than the 1B$ a year that the LHC costs to run.

Where, oh, where are you going to get people to come up with THAT kind of money?

 

[wietze]

don't think building it in cali is a good idea at all, it is not just about big damage, but also about the mini-quakes, those can throw equipment out of alignment.
the equipment is finicky enough as it is.
the valley seems to have no faults (fresno etc), but considering the amount of stuff going on around, wouldn't even take the risk

this usgs shows all us fault lines
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/map/#qfaults

so washington state might be better
in texas, the western parts would work

 

[Alamo]

But magic science will kill us all, right?

The people and politicians of Texas were eager supporters of the SSC. In addition to the Texan congressional delegation being some of the strongest backers to the project, a state referendum on a bond to help pay for the SSC passed with overwhelming support - Texas pledged to take on a quarter of the construction costs.

 

[Archibald]

So, the SSC was going to cost something like 12B$? (Twice the cost of the LHC), and presumably then cost more than the 1B$ a year that the LHC costs to run.

Where, oh, where are you going to get people to come up with THAT kind of money?

By defunding the big quagmire that was Space Station Freedom. As of 1992-93 the two were competing for Congress spending. Overall, the SSC is a better investment than ISS. Better science.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

By defunding the big quagmire that was Space Station Freedom. As of 1992-93 the two were competing for Congress spending. Overall, the SSC is a better investment than ISS. Better science.

Right. It's a big government project. The OP wanted it done by private funds. Really?