Home » Posts tagged 'Roger Andrews' (Page 3)

Tag Archives: Roger Andrews

The big news this week is Trump’s re-imposition of sanctions on Iran, which will cut Iran’s oil production to the point where, combined with cratering oil production from Venezuela, it could cause another oil price spike. We follow with our usual mix – more on Iran, Venezuela and OPEC; oil in Norway; gas pipeline constraints in Europe; Japan moves to coal; British Columbia misses its renewables target; stalemate at the Bonn Climate Conference; California to mandate rooftop solar on new houses; Tesla’s 1GW battery; hydrogen storage in UK; the Swansea Bay tidal standoff; more cracks at Hunterston and how the ravages of climate change threaten historical records.

Reuters: Sanctions spell the end of OPEC output deal

President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the nuclear agreement with Iran marks the end of the current output agreement between OPEC and its allies.

The prospective removal of several hundred thousand barrels per day of Iranian exports from the market will require a major adjustment. Saudi Arabia and its close allies Abu Dhabi and Kuwait hold almost all the spare capacity that could respond quickly to a reduction in Iranian exports. U.S. shale producers could also increase their output but it would take time and their light crude is not a good substitute for heavier Iranian oil. Russian firms may also hold spare capacity and could certainly increase output over a 12-month horizon. Their crude is a close equivalent to Iranian grades.

CNN: Oil prices could hit $100 a barrel next year

Collapsing oil production in Venezuela and potential export disruptions in Iran could push the price of Brent crude as high as $100 per barrel in 2019. Bank of America analysts said their target price for Brent, the global benchmark, was $90 for the second quarter of next year. But they warned there was a risk that deteriorating conditions in Iran would push prices to $100, a level not seen since 2014.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

A review of recent solar & wind auction prices

May 8, 2018

A review of recent solar & wind auction prices

Recent renewable energy auctions in a number of countries have been won by record low solar and wind bids – proof, according to some media sources, that wind and solar are already cheaper than fossil fuels. This post addresses the question of whether these low bids are realistic and concludes that they probably aren’t. But a detailed assessment of why they aren’t – and why wind and solar auction bids vary so much from country to country – is beyond the scope of a single blog post. Correspondents who can supply country-specific details on these questions are encouraged to provide them.

In recent years auctions have become the vehicle of choice for governments seeking to expand their renewable energy sectors. Instead of setting up generous subsidy schemes and leaving development up to the market, auctions allow governments to specify how much new renewable capacity they want, when they want it by, and in some cases even the time of day over which the power is to be delivered. Auctions, in short, allow governments to plan their transition to renewables in accordance with the targets they have set – always assuming, of course, that they are capable of developing plans that keep the lights on.

The auctions are also often described as being “capacity-neutral”, meaning that bidders can bid coal- or gas- fired power if they want to. As a practical matter, however, wind and/or solar almost always win because of their zero fuel cost and because the costs of matching the intermittent generation from these sources to demand are ignored.

We begin with some historical perspective. Figure 1 shows average wind and solar bid prices between 2010 and 2016, before the most recent round of auctions (data from the International Renewable Energy Association (IRENA):

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The causes of the differences between European and US residential electricity rates

April 30, 2018

The causes of the differences between European and US residential electricity rates

The price of residential electricity has risen in lockstep with growth in renewable capacity in Europe but not in the US, and because of this European residential electricity rates are now roughly twice US rates. The reasons for the difference are a) that renewables surcharges are added to residential electricity bills in Europe but not in the US and b) that residential electricity bills in Europe have increased roughly in proportion to the amount of money spent on renewables growth. Residential rates in US states are set by state Public Utility Commissions that are legally obliged to set prices at levels that are fair to both consumers and providers. As a result the European bill payer pays for new wind, solar etc. while US renewables expenditures are offset by adjustments to the federal budget that are not itemized but which ultimately get paid by the US taxpayer.

A note before proceeding. Electricity bills in Europe typically contain renewable energy levies, fees, surcharges etc. that are paid to the electricity provider. How much of this ends up in the hands of the government is unknown, so in this post I classify these added costs as “charges” rather than “taxes”.

We begin with a map of the US “Lower 48” showing average state retail electricity rates in US cents/kWh in 2016. The map is dominated by blue colors, i.e. less than 15c/kWh. The data are from the US Energy Information Administration:

Figure 1: Average retail electricity prices in the US Lower 48 in 2016, US cents/kWh

And follow up with a map that covers roughly the same area showing average retail electricity rates by country in Europe in 2016. The color coding is the same, and rates are converted into US cents/kWh using the exchange rate at the time of converion (1 euro = 1.22 USD) so that they can be compared directly with the Figure 1 results. The data are from Eurostat.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

A brief review of the New England electricity sector

April 25, 2018

A brief review of the New England electricity sector

New England’s transition to renewable electricity is complicated by differences between the generation mixes in and the renewables targets set by its six component states. New England’s approach to fostering renewables by replacing dispatchable fossil fuel generation with wind and solar also does not help. New England does not have enough pipeline capacity to feed its gas plants during high-demand periods when gas generation is most needed, and during the cold weather at the end of 2017 it had to mobilize essentially all of its remaining coal and oil-fired capacity to keep the lights on. If coal and nuclear plant retirements continue blackouts would appear to be inevitable during future cold weather periods. Barring a miraculous advance in energy storage technology New England’s electricity sector also has essentially zero chance of ever going 100% renewable. (Inset: 670 MW Pilgrim nuclear plant, scheduled for shutdown in 2019).

I’m always eager to add more electricity grid data to my collection, and regular correspondent Willem Post recently sent me 2017 daily generation and demand data for the New England Independent Service Operator (ISIO) grid that appear to be reliable and which I have used as the basis for this analysis. So a hat tip to Willem.

New England consists of six states in the northeastern US (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Maine) with a total population of 8 million and an annual electricity demand of ~115 TWh, about the same as the Netherlands. State locations are shown in the map below:

There are, however, large differences between generation mixes in the different states:

Connecticut: 50% nuclear, 50% gas (0% renewables)
Maine: 11% wind, 25% gas, 29% hydro, 27% biomass (77% renewables)
Massachusetts: 13% oil, 62% gas, 15% nuclear, 9% renewables
New Hampshire: 50% nuclear, 33% gas, renewables “most of the rest” (maybe 15%?)
Rhode Island: 94% natural gas, 4% renewables
Vermont: 16% wind, 5% solar, 56% hydro, 23% biomass (100% renewables)

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The seawater pumped hydro potential of the world

April 18, 2018

The seawater pumped hydro potential of the world

As discussed in numerous previous posts the world will need immense amounts of energy storage to transition to 100% renewables, or anywhere close to it, and the only technology that offers any chance of obtaining it is sea water pumped hydro (SWPH) storage. Here I consider the practical aspects of SWPH and conclude that there are only three places in the world where a combination of favorable shoreline topography and minimal impacts would allow any significant amount of SWPH to be developed – Chile (discussed here), California (discussed here) and, of all places, Croatia. For the rest of the world nuclear remains the only proven decarbonization technology. (Inset, Valhalla’s proposed SWPH project in Chile.)

In the last few weeks I have wandered through Google Earth looking for prime SWPH potential and have found that most of the world has none (I have not looked closely at Africa). The coastal topography in most places is too low and flat, and where it isn’t the valleys lack good dam sites, and/or are full of people, and/or the sites are too far from the sea. The sites that do exist are also often in scenic areas where significant public opposition may be expected whether there are any people there or not.

This point was forcibly brought home to me by Euan Mearn’s comments on Scottish Scientist’s Loch Ness Monster of Energy Storage guest post, which proposed a 6.8 TWh SWPH upper reservoir at Strath Dearn in the Scottish Highlands. Considered purely in terms of potential Strath Dearn is probably the best SWPH prospect in the UK, but if Euan’s reaction to the proposal is shared by others the chances it will ever get built are effectively zero:

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Pumped hydro energy storage in Australia – Snowy 2.0 vs. sea water

March 12, 2018

Pumped hydro energy storage in Australia – Snowy 2.0 vs. sea water

To support a 100% renewable electricity sector Australia will need approximately 10 terawatt-hours of long-term energy storage. The multi-billion-dollar Snowy 2.0 pumped hydro project will supply only 0.35 terawatt-hours, a small fraction of this, and conventional pumped hydro potential elsewhere in Australia, including Tasmania, will not fill the gap. This post addresses the question of whether Australia might not do better to pursue sea water pumped hydro instead of Snowy 2.0-type projects. Sea water pumped hydro potential in Australia is limited by the lack of suitable coastal topography, but there are sites capable of storing very large amounts of sea water at distances of more than 20km from the coast. The question is whether these sites can be developed and operated at acceptable cost.

First we must establish how much energy storage Australia will need to support all-renewables electricity mixes of the types envisioned by Blakers et al. I don’t have the data necessary to make a firm estimate, but in this previous post I estimated that between 2.8 and 4 TWh would be needed over a three-month period, which as I noted at the time “will underestimate long-term storage requirements, quite possibly by a large amount.” I have no way of knowing how much larger the amount might be, but 10 TWh (10,000 GWh) is a good round number, so in the absence of more definitive data I have used this as Australia’s “target”.

First, the Snowy 2.0 pumped hydro project. Details are available in the Snowy 2.0 feasibility study and are summarized thus in Snowy Hydro’s summary web page:

Snowy 2.0 is a pumped-hydro expansion of the Snowy Scheme which will supercharge existing generation and large-scale storage capabilities. (It) will link the two existing reservoirs of Tantangara and Talbingo through underground tunnels and there will be an underground power station in between with pumping capabilities. (It) will increase generation capacity of up to 2000 megawatts, and at full capacity, about 350,000 megawatt hours (350 gigawatt hours) of energy storage.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Global CO2 emissions forecast to 2100

March 7, 2018

Global CO2 emissions forecast to 2100

In his recent post Euan Mearns projected global energy requirements out to 2100. In this brief post I apply Euan’s methodology to carbon dioxide emissions, which are closely correlated with energy consumption. The projections show CO2 emissions peaking around 2075 under the UN low population growth scenario but continuing to increase through 2100 under the UN’s medium and high population growth scenarios. The alleged “dangerous interference” threshold of 1 trillion tons of cumulative carbon emissions (3.67 trillion tons of CO2) targeted by the Paris Climate Agreement is exceeded between 2050 and 2055 under all three scenarios.

Figure 1 plots global CO2 emissions and total primary energy consumption between 1965 and 2016. The data are from the BP 2016 Statistical Review. Note that the CO2 data cover only emissions from fossil fuel combustion. Other greenhouse gases such as methane and Nox are not included:

Figure 1: Global CO2 emissions and primary energy consumption, 1965-2016

The near-exact match between CO2 emissions and energy consumption (R² = 0.998) is obvious. What is not obvious is any detectable impact from the world’s efforts to cut CO2 emissions, which began at Kyoto over 20 years ago in 1997. (The combination of flattening emissions and moderate economic growth after 2013 has been claimed as evidence that energy and emissions are finally becoming decoupled, but global CO2 emissions in 2017 have risen again – by about 2% over 2016 according to Carbon Brief.)

Figure 2 plots global per-capita CO2 emissions since 1965, calculated from the BP emissions data and the UN’s global population estimates:

Figure 2: Global per-capita CO2 emissions

This plot is similar to the plot of per-capita energy consumption shown in Figure 1 of Euan Mearn’s post, which we would expect given the close correlation between emissions and energy, but the trend is less steep. The likely reason is that the proportion of world primary energy supplied by low-carbon sources (nuclear, hydro, renewables) has increased from about 6% in 1965 to approaching 15% now. Nevertheless the overall trend is still upward.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Cost of 100% renewables: The Jacobson et al. 2018 Study

February 26, 2018

The Cost of 100% renewables: The Jacobson et al. 2018 Study

Proponents of a global transition to 100% renewable energy point to a number of studies which claim to show that such a transition is feasible, and arguably the most influential of these is the study of Jacobson et al. 2017, an updated 2018 version of which is now available. Jacobson’s methodology is far too complex to be reviewed here, and besides Clack et al. 2017 have already reviewed it. This post therefore summarizes what the Jacobson study says will be needed in the way of new generation, energy storage etc. to convert the world’s energy sector – electricity, transportation, industry, agriculture, the lot – to 100% wind, water and sunlight power (WWS) by 2050. Among other things it calls for a thirty-fold expansion in total world WWS capacity, including a seventy-fold increase in wind + solar capacity, and up to 16,000 terawatt-hours of energy storage. And the cost? Well, a few trillion here, a few trillion there, and pretty soon we‘re talking real money.

The updated Jacobson et al. 2018 study (hereafter J2018) is available in preprint form here. A hat-tip to correspondent “Zigak” for providing this unpaywalled link.

J2018 is more than just another renewable energy study. It’s a blueprint for transitioning the entire global economy to 100% renewables by 2050. The complexities involved in achieving such a conversion are of course enormous, and the way j2018 handles them is far beyond my capacity to summarize here. Clack et al. 2017 have nevertheless reviewed them, and their criticisms of Jacobson’s methodology are provided here for anyone who may be interested in a more detailed analysis of specifics.

But what has not so far come through – and this applies whether J2018’s plan works or not – is the sheer scale of J2018’s proposals. What might be required in the way of new capacity, new generation, new energy storage etc.?

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Battery storage* in perspective – solving 1% of the problem

February 19, 2018

Battery storage* in perspective – solving 1% of the problem

The energy world is fixated on the “huge” amounts of battery storage presently being installed to back up slowly-increasing levels of intermittent renewables generation. The feeling seems to be that as soon as enough batteries are installed to take care of daily supply/demand imbalances we will no longer need conventional dispatchable energy – solar + wind + storage will be able to do it all. Here I take another look at the realities of the situation using what I hope are some telling visual examples of what battery storage will actually do for us. As discussed in previous posts it will get us no closer to the vision of a 100% renewables-powered world than we are now.

*Note: “Battery storage” covers all storage technologies currently being considered, including thermal, compressed air, pumped hydro etc. Batteries are, however, the flavor of the moment and are expected to capture the largest share of the future energy storage market.

This post is all about the difference between pipe dreams and reality. Prof. Mark Jacobson of Stanford University et al. have just published a new study that responds to the critics of their earlier 2017 study. The new study is paywalled, but Stanford’s press release describes the basic procedures used:

For the study, the researchers relied on two computational modeling programs. The first program predicted global weather patterns from 2050 to 2054. From this, they further predicted the amount of energy that could be produced from weather-related energy sources like onshore and offshore wind turbines, solar photovoltaics on rooftops and in power plants, concentrated solar power plants and solar thermal plants over time. These types of energy sources are variable and don’t necessarily produce energy when demand is highest.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The pumped hydro storage potential of the Great Lakes

February 12, 2018

The pumped hydro storage potential of the Great Lakes

The potential energy contained in the waters of the Great Lakes amounts to approximately six thousand terawatt hours, enough to supply the US and Canada with electricity for an entire year were the lakes to be drained to sea level. This of course will never happen, but there may be potential for partial utilization of the resource. A pumped hydro system that uses Lakes Huron and Michigan as the upper reservoir and Lake Ontario as the lower could theoretically generate 10 terawatt-hours, or more, of seasonal energy storage without changing lake levels significantly. The most likely show-stopper is the increased likelihood of flooding in the lower St. Lawrence River during pumped hydro discharge cycles. (Inset: Niagara falls runs dry in 1969).

The idea of using the Great Lakes for pumped hydro storage isn’t new – I remember reading about it once before but can no longer find the article. What brought it back to mind was a comment posted by Alex on the recent 100% renewable California thread in which he agreed that while there were indeed no fresh water lakes that no one cared about there were some that could perhaps be adapted for pumped hydro without anyone noticing:

Alex says:
January 18, 2018 at 5:02 pm

“The only existing fresh-water lakes that would be feasible targets for large-scale pumped hydro are in fact those that no one cares about.”

Or perhaps those that are so big you won’t notice the change. Here is a modelling challenge: Lake Ontario and either Lake Erie or Lake Huron.

I estimate 6TWh per metre elevation change in Lake Ontario.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Blowout Week 215

February 11, 2018

Blowout Week 215

This week’s lead story highlights the perils of basing policy decisions on speculative computer models. It seems that the ozone layer isn’t healing as predicted after all, so the dangers of man-made CFC radiation are still with us. And if radiation doesn’t do the job other computer models now tell us that melting permafrost threatens us with death from mercury poisoning. And if neither happens the forthcoming magnetic pole reversal spells the demise of civilization as we know it. Lots more energy and climate-related stories in this bumper Blowout, too numerous to synthesize, but read on and enjoy anyway. They’re not all bad.

Newsweek: The Ozone Layer Isn’t Healing After All—and Depletion May Be More Harmful Than Ever

In the 1980s, scientists discovered a large hole in the ozone layer, exposing the Antarctic to far higher levels of UV radiation than other parts of the planet.

Aerosols and refrigerators were blamed for spewing ozone-depleting substances like chloroflurocarbons (CFCs). The Montreal Protocol agreement of 1987 led to the phasing out of CFCs and the first signs of repair in the upper stratosphere over the Antarctic.

But, for reasons as yet unknown, ozone seems to be disappearing from some parts of the lower stratosphere, a study published in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics has found. Study co-author Joanna Haigh, co-director of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change and the Environment at Imperial College London, explained in a statement: “The potential for harm in lower latitudes may actually be worse than at the poles. The decreases in ozone are less than we saw at the poles before the Montreal Protocol was enacted, but UV radiation is more intense in these regions and more people live there.” The results were a surprise to authors and defy the expectations of current models. “The finding of declining low-latitude ozone is surprising, since our current best atmospheric circulation models do not predict this effect.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Blowout Week 211

January 13, 2018

Blowout Week 211

This week we return to the Big South Australian Battery (BSAB), the alleged success of which – the “Tesla effect” – is spawning a raft of similar projects elsewhere in the country. Coming after we have Frydenberg on Snowy River; the usual dose of OPEC; Russia sells gas to the US; less gas to come from Groningen; California to close Diablo Canyon; coal in Finland, Poland, Bulgaria and Japan, hydro in Colombia; Germany’s Energiewendeproblems; renewables in Denmark and Colorado; less gas capacity planned for UK; Ineos to challenge Scotland’s fracking ban; a contingency plan needed for cold winter nights when the wind doesn’t blow; Trump reconsiders Paris and how climate change makes turtles female.

Guardian: Big new renewable projects planned across Australia as “Tesla effect” hits

Australia’s renewable energy sector responds to the success of South Australia’s Tesla lithium ion battery.

South Australia will build the world’s largest solar thermal plant, and a Queensland wind farm may be the site of a new record-breaking battery. The Aurora solar plant in Port Augusta, SA, will begin construction this year, and is slated to provide 100% of the state government’s electricity needs by 2020, the state’s acting energy minister, Chris Picton, announced on Wednesday. In Queensland, French utility Neoen – which partnered with Tesla in SA to create the world’s largest battery – may trump its own creation by building an even larger storage system at the Kaban Green Power Hub, 80km from Cairns. In December the (South Australia) state government hailed the battery’s effectiveness in dealing with power outages, and Neoen and Tesla have recently announced plans for a second collaboration to build a 20MW battery in Victoria. In order for the proposed Queensland battery to be the world’s largest, it would have to beat a soon-to-be-completed battery in South Korea, from Hyundai Electric & Energy Systems Co, which at 150MW would take the crown from South Australia.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Blowout Week 210

January 6, 2018

Blowout Week 210

Is the US about to become the world’s largest oil producer? Our feature story says yes. To follow we have Trump’s offshore leasing program; record Russian gas production; Saudi Arabia’s gasoline price hike; Germany shuts down a nuclear reactor; Australia’s industry to power down during heatwave; Coal growth in Asia; the Snowy hydro project a “write off”; UK releases plans for coal phase-out; North America’s largest lithium battery; the wind (almost) always blows somewhere in Europe; fossil-fuel burning without the CO2; Scotland’s plans to combat coastal erosion and the struggle to save chocolate from climate change extinction.

CNN Money: America could become oil king of the world in 2018

The United States is poised to ramp up crude oil production by 10% in 2018 to about 11 million barrels per day, according to research firm Rystad Energy.

Surging shale oil output should allow the United States to dethrone Russia and Saudi Arabia as the planet’s leading crude oil producer, Rystad predicted in a recent report. The prediction shows how the fracking revolution has turned America into an energy powerhouse — a transformation that President Trump has vowed to accelerate by cutting regulation. This long-term shift has allowed the U.S. to be less reliant on foreign oil, including from the turbulent Middle East. The U.S. hasn’t been the global leader, nor ahead of both Russia and Saudi Arabia, since 1975. “The market has completely changed due to the U.S. shale machine,” said Nadia Martin Wiggen, Rystad’s vice president of markets.

Reuters: U.S. oil rig count ends 2017 40 percent above year-ago levels

The U.S. oil rig count rose by about 42 percent by end-2017 compared to the corresponding period last year, as energy companies boosted spending amid a recovery in crude prices.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

How Chile’s electricity sector can go 100% renewable

January 3, 2018

How Chile’s electricity sector can go 100% renewable

If pumped hydro plants that use the sea as the lower reservoir can be put into large-scale operation Chile would be able to install at least 10 TWh of pumped hydro storage along its northern coast. With it Chile could convert enough intermittent solar into dispatchable form to replace all of its current fossil fuel generation, and at a levelized cost of electricity (provisionally estimated at around $80/MWh) that would be competitive with most other dispatchable generation sources. Northern Chile’s impressive pumped hydro potential is a result of the existence of natural depressions at elevations of 500m or more adjacent to the coast that can hold very large volumes of sea water and which form ready-made upper reservoirs.

Valhalla’s pumped hydro plant

My recent review of the Valhalla solar/pumped hydro storage project is what set me to wondering how much untapped pumped hydro potential there might be in Northern Chile, so I begin with a brief recap of pumped hydro potential there.

Valhalla’s project layout map shows its two upper pumped hydro reservoirs (they will be connected by a canal) occupying two natural depressions at around 600m elevation and about seven kilometers from the sea. According to Valhalla they can hold at least 25 million cubic meters of sea water and according to my estimates about 15 gigawatt-hours of stored energy:

Figure 1: Valhalla’s pumped hydro project layout

The question I had was how to go about identifying other prospective pumped hydro reservoir sites in the area, and the best tool at my disposal was Google Earth. So before beginning my search I checked to see whether I could duplicate Valhalla’s reservoir outlines and volumes from Google Earth, which in Northern Chile uses good-quality imagery and gives spot elevations to the nearest foot.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Blowout Week 209

December 30, 2017

Blowout Week 209

This week’s lead story features the imminent return of the Ice Age to UK – good news for those looking forward to a White Christmas. After that the usual mix: record production from the Permian, Putin replaces petroleum with natural gas; New England replaces natural gas with petroleum; nuclear plant restarts and shutdowns in Japan; German factories paid for using electricity; batteries and the California Duck Curve, solar in the Canadian Arctic; renewables in South Korea; the Scotland-Wales transmission link, UK frackers running out of time; the brutal US-Canada cold snap; Santa relocates to the South Pole and a Happy New Year to all.

Sky News: Scientists predict ‘mini ice age’ could hit UK by 2030

A mini ice age that would freeze major rivers could hit Britain in less than two decades, according to research from universities in the UK and Russia.

A mathematical model of the Sun’s magnetic activity suggests temperatures could start dropping from 2021, with the potential for winter skating on the River Thames by 2030. A team led by maths professor Valentina Zharkova at Northumbria University built on work from Moscow to predict the movements of two magnetic waves produced by the Sun. It predicts rapidly decreasing magnetic waves for three solar cycles beginning in 2021 and lasting 33 years. Very low magnetic activity on the Sun correspond with historically documented cold periods on Earth. Professor Zharkova claims 97% accuracy for the model which dovetails with previous mini ice ages, including the Maunder Minimum period from 1645 to 1715 when frost fairs were held on the frozen Thames. But she cautions that her mathematical research cannot be used as proof that there will be a mini ice age this time around, not least because of global warming.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Tag Archives: Roger Andrews

Content

Post categories

Economic Links

Energy/Resource Links

Environmental Links

Geopolitical Links

Liberty Links

News Links

Other Links

Survival Skills

Post Archives by Category

Post navigation

Latest Posts