Haunting photos from Fukushima, one year later: "Invisible You," by Satoru Niwa

Japanese photographer Satoru Niwa, whose work I blogged in a previous Boing Boing post, has a new series from Fukushima marking the one-year anniversary of the March 11 disaster: Invisible You. Again, beautiful, evocative work. Above: a shot from the town of Namie, which is some 40 miles from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. View the full gallery here (warning: Flash).

• [Hugh Stimson]

  It find it weird that we’ve had a year of attention focused on the Fukushima disaster, which has killed no one and *might* eventually kill 100s, but no one seems interested in the repercussions of the earthquake and tsunami that killed 15 000 + and wiped out urban landscapes.

  • [Cognitect]

    It’s not only weird but also deeply disturbing and depressing, because it demonstrates how much irrational fear of nuclear energy people feel. It almost seems plausible that if forced to make a choice between either letting civilization die or relying on nuclear power, most people would simply choose to give up and let their children starve in the cold and dark.

  • [Adela Doiron]

     There are cranks trying to claim that hundreds have died of radiation already and that it’s being kept secret. Sadly the anti nuke crowd is going to blame every cancer and aberration on Fukushima for generations as if radiation is the only thing that causes those. If only all the heavy metals, fossil fuels and industrial chemicals released into the environment by the wave wiping out full towns was being sampled and monitored to the same degree.

  • [AnthonyC]

    Seriously. If the anti-nuclear crowd held coal, oil, and gas to anywhere near the same standard they hold nuclear power, the world would be a very, very different place.

    Remember, BANANAs: risks are relative and quantifiable. By focusing on nuclear exclusively, you encourage the release of heavy metals, sludge, mining waste, ash, and, yes, uranium and thorium from the burning of coal (which are not captured and sequestered the way a nuclear plant’s wastes are). Ditto for those who object to wind based on the belief that the danger to birds is unacceptably high, and that solar destroys desert ecosystems. There is no zero risk option, because not consuming energy means people are going to suffer from the loss of the things we use energy for.

    A little less hysteria, a little more long-term planning, please.

• [Michael Walsh]

  Why is it scary? Looks like a bunch of moody photos of random junkyards and subway stations, many of which have people in them. Reminds me of that picture of the playground swings and doll’s head  somebody posed in Chernyobel years ago and have been photographing ever since.