Fukushima Daiichi And
What's In It For Me?
Why is it that we band together during a hurricane, tornado, flood, fire, protest? People we've lived next to for 10 years who've never taken the time to turn around to speak to us finally come out in a friendly, communal manner to communicate, help and gather.
We all have the same goal and same resulting in "what's in it for me." We all want our phones, our food holders and to regulate the heat in our homes and have no hurricane damage from falling trees, lightning or water. To accomplish this, we actually form a bonded, meaningful community in the process - until the scourge is over, at which time we go about our egocentric lives, thoughts and actions. (Of course, it is truly important to care for our families, number one, and our extended families, number two; so we usually accept this type of living as normal.)
Why don't we all, as humans, look at preventing a global disaster for our sisters or brothers, such as Fukushima Daiishi?
The answer, I'm afraid, is that radiation is not currently in our face, eating our flesh. It is only contaminating a few fish on the west side of our country.
In the energy efficient lighting space, I have watched as many private and public concerns, large and small, government and not, choose NOT to save money instantly by changing to a new, more efficient, less psychologically damaging lighting systems. The hesitation to change came from the same place as neighbors' not helping each other except in crisis: people couldn't see "what's in it for me" clearly, because of the upfront lighting costs, which would have been absorbed by the savings from the new lights.
The status quo remains the same. Imminent disaster makes us move. We are blind to the plight of our own world until a disastrous occurrence arises. If there is any chance of a volcanic eruption around the Fukushima Daiichi Facility, that radiation specialists conclude could irradiate the planet, isn't this a large enough "what's in it for me?"