Life after a Nuclear Catastrophe: An Inside Look [Slide Show]

Why do people choose to stay near places like Chernobyl and Fukushima?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This series of photographs explores why people chose to remain after nuclear disasters struck their locales and their lives afterward. They are excerpted from Would You Stay?, by Michael Forster Rothbart. TED Conferences, October 28, 2013.

The 1986 nuclear meltdown and explosion at Chernobyl scattered radioactive fallout across 30 European countries. Yet in the regions of Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus, which suffered the worst contamination, the majority of the population stayed. Their lives remain littered with unanswered questions about safety and their futures, but they refuse to go. Chernobyl is home.

A generation later, after the 2011 earthquake and tsunami triggered meltdowns and multiple explosions in a power plant that's still leaking nuclear waste, the people of Fukushima, Japan, confront the same impossible questions. Attempts are being made to remove radioactive materials from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant reactor Unit 4, but much uncertainty remains about the future.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Photojournalist Michael Forster Rothbart traveled to both Chernobyl and Fukushima to try to understand both why people refuse to leave, despite the risks, as well as what happens to those who do move away. Forster Rothbart hopes to help reveal with his photos the true value of home and to confront the ultimate question after a nuclear accident: Would you stay?

View a slide show of life after nuclear disasters.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe