Dublin Bay incinerator gripe

silverharp

I live in Sandyount so will live quite close to the proposed incinerator in Ringsend, not a week goes by that something comes though the door arguing against this, personally it doesn’t bother me, Incinerators are common throughout Europe and are a hell of a lot better then land fill. I agree the traffic maybe a problem and that other form of recycling maybe more inspired however here is my gripe

Irish people make a sport out of fly tipping, burning waste in their garden’s (maybe more of a country issue) and generally not being very environmentally aware, so when local action committees get going over incinerators is this NIMBY pure and simple and if so why?

If there is a genuine concern for health, I would say to the good people of Ringsend that bad food, smoking and lack of exercise will kill you and your kids more surely then any theoretical risks from an incinerator.

To the good people of Sandyount I would say dump your SUV’s and Mercs if you want to do the community a favour and and stop clogging up a village built in the 19th century

To the local politicians I would say, if ye are not jumping on a band wagon, and you want to do the most good for the most amount of people, forget about the incinerator and worry about why one can’t be seen to if you arrive at an A&E

So are my views out of order or do I have a point that people get focused on the wrong issues and ignore simple solution to more important issues?

Pazaz 21

silverharp wrote:

I live in Sandyount so will live quite close to the proposed incinerator in Ringsend, not a week goes by that something comes though the door arguing against this, personally it doesn’t bother me, Incinerators are common throughout Europe and are a hell of a lot better then land fill. I agree the traffic maybe a problem and that other form of recycling maybe more inspired however here is my gripe

Irish people make a sport out of fly tipping, burning waste in their garden’s (maybe more of a country issue) and generally not being very environmentally aware, so when local action committees get going over incinerators is this NIMBY pure and simple and if so why?

If there is a genuine concern for health, I would say to the good people of Ringsend that bad food, smoking and lack of exercise will kill you and your kids more surely then any theoretical risks from an incinerator.

To the good people of Sandyount I would say dump your SUV’s and Mercs if you want to do the community a favour and and stop clogging up a village built in the 19th century

To the local politicians I would say, if ye are not jumping on a band wagon, and you want to do the most good for the most amount of people, forget about the incinerator and worry about why one can’t be seen to if you arrive at an A&E

So are my views out of order or do I have a point that people get focused on the wrong issues and ignore simple solution to more important issues?

People like to make a big fuss about things that they think they can change, or that require not that much effort, besides shouting and waving a placard. Sure we can get an incinerator moved, but how the hell do we fix the health system?

People don't want to face up to the fact that they eat too much, don't get enough exercise, etc, because it means they have failed and they will have to do something about it.
Where as if the government are trying to build an incinerator in their back garden, its the government's fault and the government should do something about it, because its the government's fault.

See what i'm getting at, its easier to blame someone else then to take responsibility yourself!

silverharp

pazaz 21 - you've posted exactly what I was trying to say! cheers!

Pazaz 21

silverharp wrote:

pazaz 21 - you've posted exactly what I was trying to say! cheers!

I aim to please:D

Raytown Rocks

silverharp wrote:

So are my views out of order or do I have a point that people get focused on the wrong issues and ignore simple solution to more important issues?

Hi Silverharp

I dont belive them to be out of order, after all you are entitled to your opinions, however I do belive this to be an important issue, especially to the people of the surrounding area. As far as local people are concerned they are not focused on the wrong issue, this is a very real, and very important issue to the people of Ringsend/Irishtown/Sandymount..
I for one oppose it, I do not think the local area will be capable of taking the amount of trucks that will be scheduled to pass through.
I also do not agree with the current location, due to the fact that the area in question is already saturated with heavy duty industries, ESB,Sewage treatment ( that doesnt work too well in summer),dockworks,scrap yard.
It seems to me the people of the area have had to put up with enough for long enough.

If there is a genuine concern for health, I would say to the good people of Ringsend that bad food, smoking and lack of exercise will kill you and your kids more surely then any theoretical risks from an incinerator.

This could be said to any set of people in any town/village/area in Ireland, an Incinerator nearby will not help the local athmosphere in any way.If you vist Ringsend park/Sean Moore park any given evening ( mainly summer) or at weekends you will see many many children out playing sports of all types for many clubs in the area, so people locally do want their kids to exercise.
As do a lot of locals themselves exercise.


You talk of Sandymount people changing their cars because a 19th century Village is not built for them, but yet Ringsend Village ( which is as old if not older) has to put up with hundreds of heavy vehicles passing through it everyday,So for every SUV removed in Sandymount you can be sure a 40 foot truck and trailer passing through Ringsend will be replacing it in the future.

The recent review on the incinerator has stated that it will not be used purely for the incineration of Irish waste, but will also be used to burn imported waste. The Incinerator has to run at full capacity at all times and to do so the government will take in foreign refuse ( at a price) to keep the incinerator moving. So the government see this as a way of making money, not just a way to reduce waste.

Also NTR ( yes I said NTR) are to be heavily involved in the incinerator, but the way the current setup is all Trucks entering Ringsend must come in ( those from a greater distance anyway) via the M50 (toll),Port Tunnell (toll), Eastlink(toll), so obviously these guys will want to see the incinerator on the Irishtown peninsula. Would it not make more sense for an Incinerator that will have hundreds of trucks coming and going day and night be built as close to the M50 as possible to facilitate easy access.

chef

Pazaz 21

chef wrote:

Hi Silverharp

I dont belive them to be out of order, after all you are entitled to your opinions, however I do belive this to be an important issue, especially to the people of the surrounding area. As far as local people are concerned they are not focused on the wrong issue, this is a very real, and very important issue to the people of Ringsend/Irishtown/Sandymount..
I for one oppose it, I do not think the local area will be capable of taking the amount of trucks that will be scheduled to pass through.
I also do not agree with the current location, due to the fact that the area in question is already saturated with heavy duty industries, ESB,Sewage treatment ( that doesnt work too well in summer),dockworks,scrap yard.
It seems to me the people of the area have had to put up with enough for long enough.



This could be said to any set of people in any town/village/area in Ireland, an Incinerator nearby will not help the local athmosphere in any way.If you vist Ringsend park/Sean Moore park any given evening ( mainly summer) or at weekends you will see many many children out playing sports of all types for many clubs in the area, so people locally do want their kids to exercise.
As do a lot of locals themselves exercise.


You talk of Sandymount people changing their cars because a 19th century Village is not built for them, but yet Ringsend Village ( which is as old if not older) has to put up with hundreds of heavy vehicles passing through it everyday,So for every SUV removed in Sandymount you can be sure a 40 foot truck and trailer passing through Ringsend will be replacing it in the future.

The recent review on the incinerator has stated that it will not be used purely for the incineration of Irish waste, but will also be used to burn imported waste. The Incinerator has to run at full capacity at all times and to do so the government will take in foreign refuse ( at a price) to keep the incinerator moving. So the government see this as a way of making money, not just a way to reduce waste.

Also NTR ( yes I said NTR) are to be heavily involved in the incinerator, but the way the current setup is all Trucks entering Ringsend must come in ( those from a greater distance anyway) via the M50 (toll),Port Tunnell (toll), Eastlink(toll), so obviously these guys will want to see the incinerator on the Irishtown peninsula. Would it not make more sense for an Incinerator that will have hundreds of trucks coming and going day and night be built as close to the M50 as possible to facilitate easy access.

chef

I agree that the incinerator should be built in a less built up area and should be nearer to the M50, in this case. Oh course it's all about the money, everything is, but if the government can get extra money to put into education and the health system by burning other countries rubbish, well good for them.

On man's rubbish, is another mans treasure !!:D

Raytown Rocks

Pazaz 21 wrote:

People like to make a big fuss about things that they think they can change, or that require not that much effort, besides shouting and waving a placard. Sure we can get an incinerator moved, but how the hell do we fix the health system?

People don't want to face up to the fact that they eat too much, don't get enough exercise, etc, because it means they have failed and they will have to do something about it.
Where as if the government are trying to build an incinerator in their back garden, its the government's fault and the government should do something about it, because its the government's fault.

See what i'm getting at, its easier to blame someone else then to take responsibility yourself!

Pazaz
Again I see quotes about exercising/eating/health/medical...becuse it means admitting they have failed,This is the same country wide not just where the incinerator is proposed to be built.
Can you give a reason why it SHOULD be built in Ringsend.
Chef

Only saw your post above^^^^^^^ after typing this one, I'm glad you agree it shouldnt be in a built up area, but can we guarantee any money raised would in fact be put back into education and health.

Pazaz 21

chef wrote:

Pazaz
Again I see quotes about exercising/eating/health/medical...becuse it means admitting they have failed,This is the same country wide not just where the incinerator is proposed to be built.
Can you give a reason why it SHOULD be built in Ringsend.
Chef

Only saw your post above^^^^^^^ after typing this one, I'm glad you agree it shouldnt be in a built up area, but can we guarantee any money raised would in fact be put back into education and health.

I suppose we can't really guarantee, but maybe it could be made part of the deal to allow the building of the incinerator to go ahead, i assume the government gets the profits or will it be "out-sourced" to a private company to run the incinerator ?

Raytown Rocks

Pazaz 21 wrote:

I suppose we can't really guarantee, but maybe it could be made part of the deal to allow the building of the incinerator to go ahead, i assume the government gets the profits or will it be "out-sourced" to a private company to run the incinerator ?

To be honest it will probably go elsewhere for the first 20 years or more, its part of the PPA The Public Private Agreement.( I think thats what its called but open to correction)
So the guys that put up the cash to help build it get most of the profits for a pre determined amount of time......, again like the EAST/WESTLINK bridges
Suddenly it doesnt all look so rosy in the garden for the local residents...

The guys who run it will run it for profit 24x7x365..and what will the locals see for it, what will the hospitals see, what will the schools see..... NADA springs to mind.

MontgomeryClift

silverharp wrote:

Irish people make a sport out of fly tipping, burning waste in their garden’s (maybe more of a country issue) and generally not being very environmentally aware,

Yet we're being told not to do this by the ones who want the incinerator built. Hypocrisy again.

Do householders keep their garden bonfires burning 24/7? Do they order waste from abroad to burn in their fires? Do they charge people to burn waste in their fires?

silverharp

Chef - Some interesting points I agree on one level we have our fair share of infrastructure, however on another level you can’t equally apportion developments over a city, if you live near a port it’s going to attract certain types of development. I wasn’t aware that they were going to import waste, however as a country we export a lot of our recycling so fair is fair.

I just don’t rate emissions as an issue, given the right technology and management you won’t smell anything (unlike the water treatment plant) and I don’t believe there are any health consequences, it won’t make the air any better but that surely can’t be a measure of whether to agree or disagree with a project (btw I would rate floruide in the drinking water x100 more important on health terms, but I don’t get any leaflets in the door on this issue)

The additional traffic could be a problem, but given all the developments with the Eastlink/Port/port tunnel/apartment developments and the additional cars coming into the area, I don’t know if you isolate one source of traffic and focus all your energies on it.


Monty - I'm not saying that inceneration is the best from of recycling, just questionning the motives of local groups opposing it, the people of D4 are only getting up in arms because it is being built near them. If people were really thinking about a national strategy, best practice etc. then surely the Greens would be a bigger force in this country

Victor

chef wrote:

I for one oppose it, I do not think the local area will be capable of taking the amount of trucks that will be scheduled to pass through.

The trucks will be using the Port Tunnel, not Sandymount / Ringsend.

I also do not agree with the current location, due to the fact that the area in question is already saturated with heavy duty industries, ESB,Sewage treatment ( that doesnt work too well in summer), dockworks, scrap yard.

Its dockland, what do you expect?

It seems to me the people of the area have had to put up with enough for long enough.

But will the locals also give up the advantages they have? DART, secure energy supply, port access, city on their doors step, beach on their doorstep.

You talk of Sandymount people changing their cars because a 19th century Village is not built for them, but yet Ringsend Village ( which is as old if not older) has to put up with hundreds of heavy vehicles passing through it everyday,So for every SUV removed in Sandymount you can be sure a 40 foot truck and trailer passing through Ringsend will be replacing it in the future.

Nope. Port Tunnel.

Aside. And yes Ringsend is older.

The recent review on the incinerator has stated that it will not be used purely for the incineration of Irish waste, but will also be used to burn imported waste.

But at the moment we are exporting huge amounts of waste, partly due to the imbalance in trade (containers out of Ireland are cheap), but also because we have no way of dealing with certain types of waste.

Also NTR ( yes I said NTR) are to be heavily involved in the incinerator, but the way the current setup is all Trucks entering Ringsend must come in ( those from a greater distance anyway) via the M50 (toll),Port Tunnell (toll), Eastlink(toll), so obviously these guys will want to see the incinerator on the Irishtown peninsula.

NTR only have about 10 years left on the Eastlink, are losing the Westlink and trucks are toll free on the tunnel. [Edit] The Port Tunnel toll is being run by Transroute International, not NTR.

http://www.nra.ie/News/PressReleases/htmltext,2132,en.html

Would it not make more sense for an Incinerator that will have hundreds of trucks coming and going day and night be built as close to the M50 as possible to facilitate easy access.

But how would you then import the waste? By truck via Ringsend?

Raytown Rocks

Victor wrote:

The trucks will be using the Port Tunnel, not Sandymount / Ringsend.

OK given the tunnel will take most of the traffic, but only to a point. From the tunnel to the proposed site is through Ringsend ( maybe not the village) but Ringsend none the less, and close to a lot of residential houses.

Its dockland, what do you expect?

I expect the resident's to have a say in what is proposed for the area. I expect local affordable housing to be thought of, I propose better ameneties for loacls.

But will the locals also give up the advantages they have? DART, secure energy supply, port access, city on their doors step, beach on their doorstep.

Would anyone give up their advantages, a lot of people have paid a lot of money for them ( I cant imagine them wanting to give up advantages), More people have been born and bred in the area, but this doesnt mean they dont have a right to reply. So if the Dart runs through the local community or theres a beach nearby or you live close to town, people should not fight for what they belive in or disagree with they should just stay quiet and let it all just happen

Nope. Port Tunnel.

Agreed this will carry most of traffic, but my original answer was more to silverharps idea of gasguzzlers in Sandymount, causing more emessions that trucks in the area.
Aside. And yes Ringsend is older.

But at the moment we are exporting huge amounts of waste, partly due to the imbalance in trade (containers out of Ireland are cheap), but also because we have no way of dealing with certain types of waste.

Yes we are exporting a lot of waste, but the governments plan it to now burn it in Ringsend and take in other EU waste and burn it too in Ringsend. I agree exporting it is not the best way to run things, but disagree that turning this around to make money is the right way forward especially for the residents of Ringsend, who will have to live with the continuous process and no guarantee of where this money will ever be used.

NTR only have about 10 years left on the Eastlink, are losing the Westlink and trucks are toll free on the tunnel. [Edit] The Port Tunnel toll is being run by Transroute International, not NTR.

http://www.nra.ie/News/PressReleases/htmltext,2132,en.html

On this note I stand corrected.
I am somewhat scepticial though considering NTR should have handed back the Eastlink many many years ago.......and that hasnt happened.
On the Port tunnel being run ny Transroute...I again stand corrected.

But how would you then import the waste? By truck via Ringsend?

This is the crux of the point, if the incinerator stays in Ringsend ( which I hope it doesnt), it will have to import refuse from elsewhere to make it a viable business,which as previously mentioned means 24x7x365 traffic and burning. However the government are unwilling to admit this. And the local community don't want it.


Or I could easily have said "Portunnel" ....it runs both ways. Import to Northwall quays, down to the tunnel and out to the M50.
We could then see how other people feel if its in their " bckgarden".
As is always the arguement, no one ever minds where it goes as long as its not beside them.....

Victor

chef wrote:

OK given the tunnel will take most of the traffic, but only to a point. From the tunnel to the proposed site is through Ringsend ( maybe not the village) but Ringsend none the less, and close to a lot of residential houses.

Only insofar as the Eastlink passes Ringsend.

I expect the resident's to have a say in what is proposed for the area. I expect local affordable housing to be thought of, I propose better ameneties for loacls.

While yes there are blackspots in particular in Ringsend and Irishtown, the area isn't that bad, and has the city on its doorstep.

Would anyone give up their advantages, a lot of people have paid a lot of money for them ( I cant imagine them wanting to give up advantages), More people have been born and bred in the area, but this doesnt mean they dont have a right to reply. So if the Dart runs through the local community or theres a beach nearby or you live close to town, people should not fight for what they belive in or disagree with they should just stay quiet and let it all just happen

I'm just saying the area has lots of advantages, it should have its (fair) share of disadvantages.

Yes we are exporting a lot of waste, but the governments plan it to now burn it in Ringsend and take in other EU waste and burn it too in Ringsend. I agree exporting it is not the best way to run things, but disagree that turning this around to make money is the right way forward especially for the residents of Ringsend, who will have to live with the continuous process and no guarantee of where this money will ever be used.

What money? I suspect something like this would be rather break-even. They are only considering imports to stop it making a loss.

I am somewhat scepticial though considering NTR should have handed back the Eastlink many many years ago.......and that hasnt happened.

Why? Their contract hasn't expired yet.

This is the crux of the point, if the incinerator stays in Ringsend ( which I hope it doesnt), it will have to import refuse from elsewhere to make it a viable business,which as previously mentioned means 24x7x365 traffic and burning.

What traffic will imports cause? The stuff will come off a ship, into a stockpile and into an incinerator. This will leave a small residue of scrap / ash - literally a few percent.

We could then see how other people feel if its in their " bckgarden".
As is always the arguement, no one ever minds where it goes as long as its not beside them.....

Hardly backgarden, its likely to be several km from the nearest residence.

Manic Moran

Vienna is about one of the cleanest, 'nicest' cities I've ever been in. There's an incinerator in the middle of the city, they took care to make it look nice, it's clean, and it's actually now a recogniseable (in a positive way) city landmark.

http://www.cenerg.ensmp.fr/rabl/html/photoimpac.htm

I think there's a lot of kneejerking going on.

NTM

Alun

MontgomeryClift wrote:

Yet we're being told not to do this by the ones who want the incinerator built. Hypocrisy again.

Do householders keep their garden bonfires burning 24/7? Do they order waste from abroad to burn in their fires? Do they charge people to burn waste in their fires?

Hardly. But then do householders have extensive filtering on their emmissions to prevent harmful dioxins entering the atmosphere? No, I didn't think so, and that's the point. The vast majority of dioxins entering the environment every year are from exactly that source, which is why it is quite rightly banned.

Raytown Rocks

Victor wrote:

Only insofar as the Eastlink passes Ringsend.
While yes there are blackspots in particular in Ringsend and Irishtown, the area isn't that bad, and has the city on its doorstep.
I'm just saying the area has lots of advantages, it should have its (fair) share of disadvantages.

What money? I suspect something like this would be rather break-even. They are only considering imports to stop it making a loss.
Why? Their contract hasn't expired yet.
What traffic will imports cause? The stuff will come off a ship, into a stockpile and into an incinerator. This will leave a small residue of scrap / ash - literally a few percent.
Hardly backgarden, its likely to be several km from the nearest residence.

In reply to some of your questions.
Yes Ringend, Irishtown, Sandymount, we should include East wall as well are all close to the city centre, and yes they have blackspots, and no the areas arent that bad, but your saying because it has advantages, it should have disadvanages ( maybe people ideas of disadvantages differ).......but that said if the areas were to have their "fair share" of disadvantages, I dont believe an incinerator should be one of them.

This will not be built to break even, no private company that goes into agreement with the government will do so just to break even, they will do so for profit. This has been proven on every public private agreement the government has ever setup. So importing refuse will not be to stop them making a loss, as no private company in their right mind would get involved in a business that may just break even, its a business after all, and thats about profit.

In relation to NTR you know more about them than I do , so I am not in a position to preach to the converted. I though their original contract was for 15 years after the bridge opened, maybe the government extended that,but am most likely wrong on this, so am willing to concede this fact.

Considering all the imported refuse will come in on containers, and the ro-ro locations are on the Northwall quay then the containers will be travelling by truck to the incinerator.
At the moment the quay wall down on the Irishtown peninsula is being looked at for terminal's for foreign cruise ships to berth. I cannot imagine they will want to have all of this waste stockpile sitting beside the berth where they have all of these foreign travellers with a lot of money to spend, berthed overnight or for a day or two.
It would make more sense to use the exsisting ro-ro terminals,it's cheaper than building new ones.

Also the nearest resident's will be a lot less than several km away from the site. The nearest houses( Bremen road,pine road, kerlogue road, leukas road,coastguard cottages) sit right beside the roundabout onto the peninsula, The proposed site is meant to be close to the current water treatment plant, therefore its about 1 km away, but that said on a windy day im sure if its 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 km's away, for the people of the area its 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 km's to close.

Chef

silverharp

I think the emissions issue is a red herring, my guess is that the traveller bonfires at grand canal dock create more dioxons then would ever be released by the proposed plant so nobody's health will be remotely affected by this.

This leaves us with a traffic issue, either way the traffic will probably go up by 50% in the next few years beacsue of all the new apartments and offices around ringsend. In sandyount I see a whole generation of older people dying off who didn't own cars and are now being replaced by families with multiple SUV's. ditto Ringsend and probably worse because there is less off street parking. I don't see the point on complaining about one potential source of traffic

Raytown Rocks

silverharp wrote:

I think the emissions issue is a red herring, my guess is that the traveller bonfires at grand canal dock create more dioxons then would ever be released by the proposed plant so nobody's health will be remotely affected by this.

This leaves us with a traffic issue, either way the traffic will probably go up by 50% in the next few years beacsue of all the new apartments and offices around ringsend. In sandyount I see a whole generation of older people dying off who didn't own cars and are now being replaced by families with multiple SUV's. ditto Ringsend and probably worse because there is less off street parking. I don't see the point on complaining about one potential source of traffic

So you rekon traveller bonfires will cause more dioxin than an incinerator running non-stop? I find that hard to believe.
And nobody's health will be remotely affected...again I find that hard to believe, I am not saying it definitely will ( and dont want to take a risk it might), but I dont believe your in a position to say it definitely wont either.

You say traffic will go up 50% in the next few years anyway, maybe so, but thats 50% irrespective of any incinerator. So obviously tincinerator traffic wuould have to be counted on top of any normal increase anway.

So older people are dying, everywhere, being replaced by newer families everywhere, more cars on the roads everywhere, this is not just going to happen in Ringsend/Sandymount, so emissions are going to go up everywhere. So why do you keep on about cars and their emissions. This will happen country wide, the Incinerator is a issue locally.

And lastly my reason for being against it is not purely based on traffic, I have answered questions about traffic as they have arisen and have given my point of view on this, but its not my only reason as I have also stated.

Alun

chef wrote:

So you rekon traveller bonfires will cause more dioxin than an incinerator running non-stop? I find that hard to believe.
And nobody's health will be remotely affected...again I find that hard to believe, I am not saying it definitely will ( and dont want to take a risk it might), but I dont believe your in a position to say it definitely wont either.

Do you find it hard to believe, or do you just not want to believe it because it contradicts your previously held unbased opinions about incineration? Personally, I prefer to research the facts first rather than relying on unfounded "hunches".

From http://www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie/html/waste_to_energy.html

However, the reality is that chemicals like dioxins already exist in our environment and come from very familiar sources like smoking, traffic, illegal burning of waste – even home heating systems. What determines whether they do us harm is the amount or DOSE we are exposed to; for example, common chemicals like salt can be toxic to the human body if taken in large enough quantities. Even if we incinerated 1 million tonnes of municipal waste in Ireland, this would contribute less than 2% of the dioxins emitted to air (EPA, 2001). Most dioxins will continue to come from uncontrolled burning of waste in back gardens, bonfires and accidental fires.

ronbyrne2005

Not In My Back Yard matey!!!!!!!! as far as im aware this was found to be best site but its in mcdowells constituency so i doubt he'll let it happen! i've no problem with regulated low emmision incineration anywhere in dublin.

silverharp

Thanks for that Alun, I couldn’t put my hand on the info but I knew I’d heard something to the effect that uncontrolled burning was a much more potent form of Dioxins then an incinerator.

Chef – apologies for the confusion about my reference to vehicles, I’m not talking about emissions, just traffic. Traffic however isn’t necessarily additive, the reverse argument is being used by the Dublin Corp. in relation to Port traffic and the M50, they argue (correctly) that the port traffic should be put on the M50 when it opens and that traffic will “accommodate” it, others argue that the extra trucks will grind the M50 to a standstill. My point is focusing on one source of traffic is not logical, as the other sources of new traffic will have a greater impact on the area.

I’m trying to tease out what the nub of the issue is or is there a certain irrational fear of the unknown. Say for example a new supermarket was planned for the site, there might be objections who knows but there would not be public meetings etc. even though it would generate more traffic then the incinerator (my guess). I could care less that the incinerator is on my doorstep because I’ve seen them in Germany and they are the most hypochondriac nation on earth and they don’t have problems with them.