Report: Yellow powder recorded during video of Reactor No. 4 (PHOTO & VIDEO)

Published: October 30th, 2011 at 5:20 am ET
By

48 comments


Oct. 29 — “Yellow powder was recorded on the video of reactor 4,” reports Mochizuki.

“It is about reactor 4 after explosion. Fuel pool is completely destroyed,” the article says, “In reactor 4, there were MOX and Uranium.”

What was the yellow powder? “Probably it was Uranium, or Plutonium,” Mochizuki notes, “Whichever, it should not be out of the reactor.”

The government claimed yellow powder appearing after rainfall in Tokyo and other areas of Japan was pollen or sand, yet according to Mochizuki, “Pollen and sand come to Japan every year but it had never been seen before.”

Read More: Yellow powder caught by camera beside reactor 4

SOURCE: deribot2

At 1:15 in

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK_FRGfu09E

See also:

Taken Sept. 22 in Tokyo area (SOURCE: Fukushima Diary)

Published: October 30th, 2011 at 5:20 am ET
By

48 comments

Related Posts

  1. Yellow powder reported in North Kanto area after rain, as happened in late March — Near location of newly found cesium ‘mistake’ (PHOTO) September 23, 2011
  2. “Yellow rain” recently reported in Tokyo also happened after Chernobyl — Government assured residents it was pollen March 24, 2011
  3. “Yellow rain” around Tokyo caused by pollen officials say – Rain may have contained radioactivity March 24, 2011
  4. HCR: Mystery black radioactive powder detected outside school — Local official posts 3 videos of black substance (PHOTO & VIDEOS) February 24, 2012
  5. Report: Asahi TV show airs photos of mutated plants in Tokyo — Same program to feature dire situation at No. 4 fuel pool — Asked audience to send in more examples (PHOTO) April 19, 2012

48 comments to Report: Yellow powder recorded during video of Reactor No. 4 (PHOTO & VIDEO)

  • tomb1

    Sorry, but SFP4 is far from being totally destroyed. You find videos of it on YT showing some damage, but not so severe as the article claims.


    Report comment

  • many moons

    So is that the same yellow dust that is covering North America? How toxic is it…I need to know what kind of geiger counter to buy…is there one that checks the enviroment as well as food?


    Report comment

    • ocifferdave

      Covering N America? Im glad i havent witnessed that!


      Report comment

      • many moons

        I haven’t either, i don’t live there but I have read reports on this site, talk about large quantities of pollen in fall and the substance doesn’t really look like pollen and appears after rain. There have been accounts from CA, MO,CO, WA and I believe the east coasst (west, mid-west-east) oh and canada, i guess I may have exaggereated on covering the whole North America. With no data we really don’t know how many people have come in contact with this yellow dust.


        Report comment

      • occifer dave…

        Go to pt defiance park. Look in the pond water…

        See all the yellow:?

        @westcoastgirl.

        Still need someone to produce a alpha detector.


        Report comment

    • westcoastgirl westcoastgirl

      Yeah,I’m wondering what happened to taco’s sample of yellow powder…


      Report comment

    • James Tekton James Tekton

      Good morning MM,

      One of the best counters is the Inspector Alert. It is made specifically for checking food. That is why we got it to check our garden.

      Here is the link to the company that makes them.

      http://medcom.com/products/inspector-alert

      Find a dealer near you and order one. It will be expensive and will take some time to get to you but in the long run, it will be the best tool for the checking ahead.

      Blessings to everyone!


      Report comment

  • StillJill StillJill

    That’s the stuff I’ve been battling since March! That PIC of the windshield,…that is positively the same stuff!


    Report comment

  • fellfromthesun

    “Pollen and sand come to Japan every year but it had never been seen before.”

    Mochizuki is a flat-out liar. There is even a word in Japanese, 黄砂(yellow sand) for the frequent phenomena of Gobi desert sand being carried on the winds into Japan. This is a radiation risk possibly due to China nuclear weapons testing in the Gobi, but nothing to do with Fukushima.

    The photo above is so blurry as to be useless. No one in Tokyo has documented the recent “yellow rain” phenomena Mochizuki claims as fact, and the one blurry photo he has provided is un-sourced as to date, location or anything.


    Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    Brand new under Google Nuclear Industry Lies
    (i look at that in the morning too)
    http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2011/10/30/some-thoughts-on-fukushima-and-nuclear-history/
    Worth at read.


    Report comment

    • Whoopie Whoopie

      “In order to save money, to save face, to save the nuclear industry, various authorities are not admitting their knowledge. It is not 1942 anymore. Public health is an imperative, not a national secret. They can’t claim ignorance this time round. There is no such thing as a secret isotope. Authorities need to tell the whole truth.


      Report comment

      • arclight arclight

        nicely put whoppie


        Report comment

      • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

        Thanks, Whoopie,
        A quote from this article:
        “Its not like a CT Scan. Its not good for you, there are more than just iodine and cesium, the cores are still molten, the patent for the chain reaction is one which defines the method as a means of producing radioactive poisons in bulk compared to a cylcotron. That was 1934. Using a poison factory as a means of boiling water to generate steam to produce electricity is criminal in its consequences when in failure mode….”

        CT Scans cause cancer and will kill you. Nuclear chain reactions, nuclear power plants, are criminal even when not in failure mode. Depleted uranium or pure uranium in weapons, golf clubs, cluster bombs, bunker bombs, used to strengthen concrete are also criminal weapons of mass destruction. Nuclear medicine also kills the patient with damage to the circulatory system, stenosis [narrowing] of the spine, heart damage and incurable, aggressive cancers, degenerative bones.


        Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    “30 years of interim storage” also anxious residents (11/10/30)
    From: Annnewsch | Oct thirty, 2 011
    CC caption available
    http://www.youtube.com/user/ANNnewsCH#p/u/3/piC1OK8PJ14


    Report comment

    • Whoopie Whoopie

      However, the formal position of interim storage facility where the decision can not prolonged period, and in other local or continue決Maranakere where to put it in Fukushima Prefecture, is a series of outside acceptance of the VOICE OF FEAR”


      Report comment

  • arclight arclight

    yellow pollen rearing its head again….needs spectrographic testing…which didnt get done…dose rates for children and women havent been done either….

    “P R E S S R E L E A S E
    Cancer Risks for Women and Children Due to Radiation Exposure Far Higher Than for Men
    New National Academy of Sciences Report Raises Major Issues for Radiation Protection, Independent Institute Claims
    Takoma Park, Maryland, July 7, 2005
    “In 1990, the NAS estimated that the risks of dying from cancer due to exposure to radiation were about five percent higher for women than for men,” said Dr. Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. “In BEIR VII, the cancer mortality risks for females are 37.5 percent higher. The risks for all solid tumors, like lung, breast, and kidney, liver, and other solid tumors added together are almost 50 percent greater for women than men, though there are a few specific cancers, including leukemia, for which the risk estimates for men are higher.”
    “The BEIR VII report estimates that the differential risk for children is even greater. For instance, the same radiation in the first year of life for boys produces three to four times the cancer risk as exposure between the ages of 20 and 50. Female infants have almost double the risk as male infants.”
    “While the report states there is no direct evidence of harm to human offspring from exposure of parents to radiation, the committee noted that such harm has been found in animal experiments and that there is “no reason to believe that humans would be immune to this sort of harm.”
    cont….


    Report comment

      • Dr. Anne Lee Tomlinson Maziar anne

        Thanks, Whoopie. 100+ A quote from this article:
        “We are in the middle of a terrifying scientific experiment in which we and our children are the subjects. Let’s face the facts that mixing the profit motive with the most dangerous technology is a very bad idea, and that natural forces and human error are reason enough to admit nuclear power is a mistake. It’s time to move on.”

        The problem is that there will never be a chance to back away from this “experiment.” No way EVER to purify radiation. It can only accumulate. As the “experiment” fails more and more, this failure is FOREVER.


        Report comment

      • +1 LOTS of great information on this site. The FAQ page had some additional knowledge.

        A straightforward explanation:
        What can we do to protect ourselves and our children?
        http://www.radiationtruth.org/faq-what-we-can-do/

        “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” — Margaret Mead


        Report comment

      • lam335 lam335

        Interesting article–the link about “Industry and GOvernment” on that page leads to a very interesting discussion of the IAEA’s corruption. In particular, it discusses how they use an extremely limited definition of radiation-related disease to exclude most of its effects (and thus, come up with the absurd claim that Chernobyl only caused 4000 additional cancers:

        “It seems the IAEA actually does everything it can do to conceal the deleterious effects of nuclear power. The IAEA insists on a group of extremely restrictive definitions as to what qualifies as a radiation-caused illness statistic. For example, under IAEA’s criteria (3):
        -If a radiation-caused cancer is not fatal, it is not counted in the IAEA’s figures.
        -If a cancer is initiated by another carcinogen, but accelerated or promoted by exposure to radiation, it is not counted.
        -If an auto-immune disease or any non-cancer is caused by radiation, it is not counted.
        Radiation-damaged embryos or fetuses which result in miscarriage or stillbirth do not count
        -A congenitally blind, deaf or malformed child whose illnesses are are radiation-related are not included in the figures because this is not genetic damage, but rather is teratogenic, and will not be passed on later to the child’s offspring.
        -Causing the genetic predisposition to breast cancer or heart disease does not count since it is not a “serious genetic disease” in the Mendelian sense.
        -Even if radiation causes a fatal cancer or serious genetic disease in a live born infant, it is discounted if the estimated radiation dose is below 100 mSv [mSv= millisievert, a measurement of radiation exposure. One hundred millsievert is the equivalent in radiation of about 100 X-Rays].
        -Even if radiation causes a lung cancer, it does not count if the person smokes — in fact whenever there is a possibility of another cause, radiation cannot be blamed.”
        [...]


        Report comment

        • lam335 lam335

          “If all else fails, it is possible to claim that radiation below some designated dose does not cause cancer, and then average over the whole body the radiation dose which has actually been received by one part of the body or even organ, as for instance when radio-iodine concentrates in the thyroid. This arbitrary dilution of the dose will ensure that the 100 mSv cut-off point is nowhere near reached. It is a technique used to dismiss the sickness of Gulf War veterans who inhaled small particles of ceramic uranium which stayed in their lungs for more than two years, and in their bodies for more than eight years, irradiating and damaging cells in a particular part of the body.”


          Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    Occupy Fukushima
    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/10/29/occupy-fukushima/
    Six reactors are involved, four reactors and/or reactor buildings exploded and the two remaining are questionable; they could explode at anytime.
    Worse, there are four more giant billion watt reactors 6 miles South at Fukushima Daiani. These were damaged in the 3/11 earthquake but were idled and are currently decaying.
    We request the Japanese Government Protect People, not TEPCO!
    1. STOP spreading/Burning radioactive rubble all over JAPAN.
    2. EVACUATE Children from high contaminated area.
    http://www.stopdammit.org/


    Report comment

    • 3. And send out some large tankers to clean up the trash and contamination you put into the ocean.

      The Japanese should be trying to pick up their trash. At least BP ‘acted’ like like they were trying to do a cleanup in the Gulf.

      They are using OUR PLANET’S OCEAN as their personal TOXIC MASSIVE DUMP site!!!

      If I were President I would send large scooper planes, like the ones that pick up water for fighting forest fires, scoop that goo up and drop it over Tokyo’s government buildings. With notes attached that say: Clean Up Your Mess!


      Report comment

  • Whoopie Whoopie

    “I discussed radioactive contamination problem in today’s Rarejob lesson. http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/govt-announces-plan-to-store-radioactive-soil-in-fukushima
    14 minutes ago


    Report comment