N&O Index Card Listings

Displaying 1-5 of 5 results.
Super Collider
  • Reagan's support to spur N.C. action on smasher - Ja 31 87 9A
  • Unexpected requirements put squeeze on collider bid - Fe 12 87 4C
  • Added cost of pursuing collider is worth it to state, officials say - Fe 19 87 20C
  • Martin undaunted by super collider odds - Fe 21 87 1
  • Martin says funding must be increased for collider project - Fe 25 87 18C
  • Competition keen for super collider - Mr 8 87 1
  • Proposed location of supercollider (Map) - Mr 8 87 10A
  • Collider bid, waste compact linked - Mr 17 87 4C
  • Firm (Law Engineering) chosen to do study for collider - Mr 21 87 11A
  • A tiny tremor of concern for super collider bid; Microseismic noise ... - Mr 25 87 12A
  • Fund for super collider bid hits $1.15 million - Ap 2 87 1C
  • Project director named for super collider bid (Frampton) - Ap 3 87 2D
  • Collider wouldn't foul the land; But U.S. plan envisions service units around project's 53 mile ring - Ap 5 87 31A
  • N.C. seeking more time for accelerator bid - Ap 8 87 18C
  • Martin warns against collider bidding war between states - Ap 9 87 22C
  • Trying to find out what's really matter; New supercollider could hold key - My 13 87 8A
  • Officials fear amendment's effect on supercollider decision - My 23 87 4C
  • Supercollider committee lacks Tar Heels - Jn 24 87 5C
  • State's bid for supercollider gets boost in vote on land use - Jn 26 87 26D
  • Super-collider deadline extended - Jy 16 87 24C
  • Collider would bring speeded-up spending - Jy 20 87 1C
  • Computer maps go beyond the surface - Jy 22 87 8A
  • Study says super collider a large low-level waste producer - Jy 23 87 28C
  • Universities to expand physics faculties if South wins bid for super collider - Au 6 87 7B
  • Senate passes measure on super collider land - Au 13 87 20A
  • State offers dowry for super collider - Au 27 87 1
  • N.C. rated a top collider contender - Au 31 87 1C
  • State details bid for super collider; Two utilities pledge to split burden of power supply for research - Se 4 76 5D
  • Valentine has reservations about collider - Se 15 87 5C
  • Valentine clarifies super collider stand - Se 19 87 2C
  • N.C. likely to make cut for super collider, official says - Oc 28 87 2C
  • Conservation board opposes super collider bid exemption - Oc 29 87 27A
  • Super collider bid includes highway plan - No 9 87 WA-1
  • Environmental group fears collider would taint water supply - No 11 87 3C
  • Martin calls collider aid to nation - De 5 87 13A
  • N.C. passes early test for collider - De 8 87 11A
  • N.C. among 8 finalists for super collider site - De 30 87 1
Super Collider
  • N.C. sites considered for huge 'proton buster' - Fe 12 86 2C
  • N.C. begins bid for proton buster near Triangle - Ap 4 86 1D
  • Editorial: Faster than a stock car - Ap 6 86 14A
  • Proposed proton buster draws states' attention - Ap 23 86 10A
  • Proton buster's effect on Triangle focus of report - My 28 86 5C
  • N.C. sites join 30-state bid for 'proton buster' - Jn 15 86 36A
  • Accelerator could boost N.C. physics research - No 5 86 22A
Super Collider
  • (SUPER) COLLIDER's effect on water, land worries some environmentalists - Mr 29 88 1
  • (SUPER) COLLIDER's radiation risk debated - Mr 29 88 8A
  • Landowners fault state handling (on SUPER COLLIDER) - Mr 29 88 8A
  • Community ambience fills Fermilab - Mr 31 88 8T
  • Durham freeway key in state road plans for collider traffic - Mr 31 88 2C
  • Editorial: Questions in collision - Ap 3 88 6D
  • Super collider panel inspects Arizona site; N.C. visit set - Ap 21 88 16C
  • House panel rejects state collider funds - Ap 30 88 10B
  • Despite recommendation, federal funding for collider in doubt - Ma 6 88 24C
  • Martin names advisory panel for collider - Ma 10 88 18C
  • UNC board endorses efforts to lure collider - Ma 14 88 8B
  • Super collider promise leaves Guard unmoved - Ma 26 88 3C
  • Spending for collider at limit, Ramsey says - Jn 2 88 1C
  • Costly collider land purchase can wait, project director (Dunn) says - Jn 4 88 3C
  • Editorial: Ramsey cautious on collider - Jn 5 88 6D
  • Lobbyists say odds are good N.C. could get collider - Jn 8 88 2C
  • Panel approves $90,000 emergency aid for collider - Jn 8 88 18C
  • N.C. reportedly 1 of 3 collider sites - Jn 15 88 10A
  • Energy Department denies report of supercollider finalists - Jn 16 88 16C
  • N.C. paying lobbyist $20,000 a month, more than other states, to lure collider - Jn 21 88 18C
  • Martin asserts collider lobbyists doing their job - Jn 24 88 6D
  • Super collider foes set for federal visit - Jn 27 88 1C
  • Federal collider team expects local opposition - Jn 28 88 2C
  • Superconductor foes protest state funding - Jn 28 88 18C
  • DOE official praises location of collider site - Jn 29 88 1C
  • Hundreds gather to protest super collider - Jn 29 88 1C
  • N.C. group meets with DOE to push super collider bid - Jy 13 88 18C
  • Adjustments to ease collider's effect possible - Jy 14 88 2C
  • N.C. collider bid papers to be at libraries - Jy 27 88 8A
  • Scientists suggest using beam from collider to treat cancers - Jy 27 88 8A
  • Collider study reports risks to environment - Au 8 88 1C
  • Study (impact of super collider) moves to Oxford library - Au 8 88 16C
  • Super collider land not needed right away - Au 24 88 18C
  • 4,070 housing units needed for collider, study says - Au 27 88 1
  • Study details collider's impact; Increase in air pollution, development in watersheds forecast - Au 28 88 25A
  • N.C.'s chance to get collider called slight - Se 16 88 1C
  • Questions remain over timetable for super collider - Se 21 88 7D
  • N.C. could get collider, physicist (Goldberg) says - Se 23 88 3C
  • Collider would bring 9,000 jobs, report says - Se 30 88 5D
  • Super collider foes say right to speak at hearing denied - Se 30 88 5D
  • Hearing on super collider set for Butner - Oc 3 88 2C
  • Collider opponents assail draft impact study - Oc 4 88 18C
  • Martin takes collider bid to Washington - Oc 6 88 29A
  • Durham council members urge better preparation for collider - Oc 14 88 2C
  • Collider study stirs criticism - No 3 88 1C
  • Black lawmakers back Southeast collider site No 4 88 3C
  • Durham report rebutted on tax impact of collider No 8 88 WA-1
  • Federal officials plan to reveal site of collider No 10 88 1C
  • Many happy, others bitter in collider loss No 11 88 1C
  • Texas wins battle for super collider; U.S. criticizes state, local officials in rejecting N.C. - No 11 88 1
  • Members of U.S. collider panel fault Martin officials in failed bid No 15 88 1
  • N.C. 'Citizens Against the Collider Here' celebrate Texas' win - De 4 88 54A
  • Tar Heel editors speak: A super collider solution - De 11 88 7D
Super Collider
  • Super Collider study a bureaucratic tome - De 13 88 1C
  • Tar Heel editors speak: Energy officials getting antsy about collider's new problem - De 25 88 7D
Super Collider
  • Super collider panel likes Texas proposal, study says - Ja 3 88 29A
  • Evaluation revealed on super collider bid - Ja 5 88 5B
  • State council gives collider bid $260,000 boost - Ja 6 88 6D
  • Super collider site assessments puzzle state officials - Ja 21 88 14A
  • North Carolina among 7 finalists for Superconducting Super Collider - Ja 20 88 1
  • Super collider not super to all - Ja 24 88 1
  • Landowners receive letters about super collider - Ja 29 88 1C
  • Landowners to be told who's in collider's path - Fe 4 88 10B
  • Residents learn collider may hit close to home - Fe 5 88 1C
  • Super collider sales pitch not hitting home - Fe 8 88 1C
  • Martin addresses collider fears - Fe 10 88 1C
  • Under the Dome: Super collider tour set (Illinois) - Fe 19 88 6A
  • Martin to plead case in Durham for collider - Fe 21 88 36A
  • Reagan budget a mixed blessing to N.C.; Super collider could boost state, but cut in sewer grants
  • would hurt - Fe 21 88 37A
  • Person residents told they'd get fair value for collider property - Fe 23 88 4C
  • Martin: Collider could be shifted - Fe 24 88 5C
  • Selection of site for super collider delayed - Fe 24 88 5C
  • Collider has Rougemont 'ill, aggravated' - Mr 7 88 1C
  • 3-county group tours Illinois collider project - Mr 12 88 3C
  • Commissioners wary of super collider's effects on region - Mr 13 88 40A
  • Collider is opposed in Durham: Durham board votes against $4.4 billion plan - Mr 15 88 1
  • Durham collider vote shows desire for data (SUPER COLLIDER) - Mr 16 88 1
  • Watkins withdraws support for collider - Mr 17 88 1C
  • Martin fails to sway Watkins on (SUPER) COLLIDER - Mr 18 88 1C
  • Durham legislator (Miller) wavers on support for SUPER COLLIDER - Mr 19 88 10B
  • Legislator opposes (SUPER) COLLIDER; Rep. Michaux vows not to vote for funds - Mr 22 88 1C
  • Collider views put on record; Supporters and foes speak on proposal - Mr 23 88 1C
  • Congress is having second thoughts about super collider - Mr 27 88 12A
  • Illinois behind collider, but dissent voiced - Mr 27 88 13A
  • Scientists debate collider's merit - Mr 27 88 1
  • (SUPER) COLLIDER's investment value weighed; Legislators consider balance of benefits
  • against expense, opposition - Mr 28 88 8A
  • Predicted benefits of collider challenged - Mr 28 88 1