Before the agglomeration of massive amounts of depleted uranium antitank weapons in Ukraine, and the eventual firing of one of them against the Russian allies of the DNR / LNR (with chlorination within) that started the Russian counteroffensive, lays it seems essentially the story of the cement transmutation of depleted uranium into plutonium. Indeed fast gluing cements (volatile cements) are very plutogenizing (it’s like captagon pretty much… the faster it sticks, the faster neutron can go through). I discovered that – was certainly not the first one to make the discovery, but made it alone – in October 2021. I found there was an opportunity for a system of public-private partnerships that allow the progressive dismantlement of the most ugly collective inhabitation buildings (those made with fast-sticking cements are also the most ugly, it’s systemic, bad architecture, rapid gluing, go together, vite fait, mal fait !), in which the money from the resulting plutonium could be used to repay a travel back to home to the immigrants usually living in such bad architecture. I decided that the French Republic’s Commissariat à l’énergie atomique had to know first, because nuclear energy matters impose a degree of security, while explaining the public-private partnership concept and suggesting the possible direct use of the depleted uranium weapons by the private actors, thinking of a simple demolition programme, with detonations of the bombs without firing the propergols, on the ground. Myself I did not state that, thinking it was obvious…
Here is the exact email I sent :
Monsieur Jean Pierre Terraz,
J’ai une idée je pense efficace pour le long terme, la transformation architecturale de la France.
Si l’on estime que les “grands ensembles” HLM, les barres… font partie du patrimoine architectural on ne sera pas d’accord avec moi. Là c’est certain. J’ai néanmoins cette idée qui trotte en moi, que faire des gravats, après démolition, est-ce qu’en coeur nucléaire… bon j’ai réfléchi et j’affirme aujourd’hui que c’est faisable. Simplement politiquement tendu à cause de l’effet… bon je vais être honnête je suis pour une France d’avant la loi Giscard sur le regroupement familial au niveau populatoire mais l’idée qu’on se serve de l’existence des coeurs pour accélérer le départ des populations en question serait mauvaise et enrayerait sans doute pour longtemps l’activité du programme…
De graaandes cuves en tungstène 90% iridium 8% chromium 2% extérieur de 10 mètres cubes et une source neutronique ainsi que de la pressurisation par simple poids dessus pour commencer. Je regarde du sable de chantier et estime vers 0,8 le coeff de vide, on monterait vers 1 sur certains ciments blancs. En effet ça vient des panaches à neutrons rapides type Auvergne.
Donc en cassant les grands ensembles on peut préparer une source d’énergie avec des réserves d’UA et financer l’expulsion des locataires avec la vente de l’électricité pour les rembourser.
Sans parler de l’utilisation éventuelle par des compagnies de démolition de charges antitank. Voire même des anciennes à UA. Pour faire le mélange in situ. En entourant d’aspirateurs le site et en recyclant aussi ce qu’absorbent ces aspirateurs.
Florent Pirot P.S. (parfait pour parler démocratie un PS) je pense que vous connaissez mon blog. Ma dernière publication vous intéresse https://unisciencepub.com/articles/important-geophysical-comments-for-nuclear-engineers-and-for-the-world-climate-democracy/
It is definitively clear the idea was displaced to the White House and led to the plan of a mass accumulation of DU weapons in eastern Ukraine, with the physics indicating depleted uranium drift to the West with the Earth’s rotation and the knowledge of the black hole effect from Fermionic condensators (that allows nanoparticle catch) ensuring the cleaning would be possible rapidly and efficiently.
Verily with their understanding of physics Mr Terraz and the other CEA physicists obviously took a very optimistic approach but that had become possible, I repeat, with the knowledge of the power from the nanoblack hole generation within Fermionic subcritical condensator cores. It’s in a certain way possible to put the DU dust under control and solely use it for the purposes of architectural improvement through plutogenization of the gravel. There is nevertheless collateral damage because people are used as vacuum cleaners in this interpretation. At the end, after I published for the first time this message on my Facebook, I noticed a slight betterment with a Tochka-U fired against a concrete building presenting the needed features. With the needed climate coldening, some areas of trees that are of a climate that is dependent on too hot temperatures versus what is expected in a better cooled global weather are also destroyed. I noticed for instance how Aleksandr Lukashenko’s soldiers targeted oaks for that same reason for their plutogenization. And likewise for the above-mentionned Tochka-U strike.
Westinghouse got contracts for “nuclear reactors” in Ukraine and I also reached to them to encourage them to do several Fermionic subcritical condensators instead.
It’s in a certain way very innovative but also with a large set of risks to use war, in a tangentially cooperative way for architecture betterment when the basic state is extremely ugly. Myself as a former student of a teacher who proclaimed cooperative games are the “alternative to the non-cooperative games of the classical competition style” (Philippe Solal), I noted that cooperative games only work with a common scapegoat and even shouted once that actually cooperative war is possible, giving the example of a cooperative war between France and Russia where nuclear strikes would be done on the ugly suburbs. Pretty much THAT is happening. The point is that in that game cooperation is possible and realistic (unlike these new teambuilding games invented for companies, for instance, and some new games for children on the market that emerged after the beginning of the 2000s, educative games typically) because there is actually something to do in common, a third part that is commonly hated and that is the common target. In other things, without a common scapegoat (at least, or real enemy, for better cooperation) stakeholders don’t work together. Philippe Solal (and my other PhD codirector Michel Bellet) rejected René Girard’s works wholly. They could not accept the scapegoat theory at all.
CO2 emissions will be massively needed, later, to produce more trees for the building of traditional Ukrainian houses in the wooden style that is the ancient custom. (I don’t like to say “Ukrainian” because there is no such thing as a specificity of the local peoples, that descend from Cossacks, typically fast moving groups of the plains, strongly related to Russia – the sanctification of “Ukrainian Bortsch” is like the sanctification of “French Pizza”…)
In my opinion this increase in CO2 emissions in areas of forestry to massively produce housings of that traditional architecture is the indispensable condition to match the dots and fill up the equation. The instalment of SMRs in the areas of old coal mines, which the IAEA itself encourages now, certainly shall contribute to that as the NORMs in coal can be milled and used in breeder cores, while the coal is burned thermally for more electricity and CO2 emissions altogether.