A Green Degree Blog: New Angles On Sustainability

Of late, I have been beginning to question the effectiveness of our current communication of climate change issues and all their depressingly apparent relations, and whether the efforts of a global population are actually getting through to those people that really matter. Simply put, is the whole science of man-made climate change just too boring and dire for most people to care for; or is the wonderful buzz-word of the 21st century thus-far, sustainability, actually the trigger for snores all around.

I say this primarily because of the reactions some of my close friends have had to my blog and the issues I try and communicate to them within it, as well as when talking to them directly. Although many have commented on how professional or fancy it looks (sorry to blow trumpets, I honestly think they’re being kind) which is all well and good, but it’s their next comments which worry me - all but one has gone onto say that, it’s basically too damn boring, or ‘sciency’ and rarely worth their time reading for them to invest any effort in checking the actual substance of the blog out. Hmmmm.

Now admittedly, this is likely because the majority of them do not study, or have a real interest in anything to do with environmental science or the state of global energy needs, not least to the level I do, but I am always trying to write my posts and my thoughts down in the most informal and chatty of ways, so as to entice the broadest audience I can. Maybe this just isn’t the case however, and my posts are in fact too wordy or niche for people lacking a knowledge of the topics to get involved. By the way, if this is the case, please please please comment on my blog, send me advice or criticism and help me improve the thing, I’m feeling lonely here.

Moving away from my simple little blog, I remember a post I did a while back surrounding the US youth and their commitment to sustainability issues (I am moving away from it, I promise), in which multiple studies had been carried out assessing this very subject. I was surprised to see that the large majority of US residents were well aware of the problems of climate and concerned, in some cases deeply, about the consequences.

What I was more surprised about however was a study by the Chicago AP on students, or the ‘millennials’, those of us born straight into the climate debate. Here they found that this group has become increasingly un-invested in the environment and concern has been dropping off, with many seemingly admitting defeat or turning their heads to other, more accessible issues. One of the most convincing answers I’ve seen explaining this study, and one I share completely, is that the combined media coverage, doomsaying individuals and countless numbers of studies released daily by the academic circles is literally drowning some people.

Students just cannot handle the multiple directions the information is coming from, and have become fatigued by climate and the science, shutting down their emotional response to it. This is highly worrying, and was brought home to me when my friends commented on my blog, and is the factor I feel most at risk of derailing the entire sustainability effort if nothing is done.

Climate communication has always been one of the biggest issues faced by policy-makers and governmental bodies, but now more than ever I feel we have the technology to elevate it to a global scale. Social media. With the immense social-sphere acting as a voice and a catalyst for literally billions of people around the world, socialising sustainability is pretty much the only option we’ve got left which can be effected quickly and efficiently.

We’ve tried fancy policy, involving public groups in the debate, banging on about how inherently dangerous, petty, greedy and out of control our society is, and last but not least attempting to get each and every country on the same side for many global conventions, and yet emissions still peak and fossil fuels burn.

I think it’s now time for a social, digital approach. Rio+20 is taking the lead, with it’s Social project, the first of its kind, and many more need to follow in its footsteps. If we can, as a global society, empower a network of ‘millennials’ to rekindle their interest in saving this little blue planet, perhaps through the use of a social network style comparing of company CSR or individuals, combined with a platform where effective dialogue can be introduced. This may be a rather grand and fleeting idea on my part, but it has almost got to that stage where we require more than just a kick up the ass. Let’s hope climate tipping isn’t that boot.

The solar industry is seeing growth unlike any other in recent years, with much of the attention focused on efficiencies and reaching the golden rate of sunlight absorption, around 40%, which would indicate the ceiling of solar’s power potential. 

As these rates continue to rapidly progress through the roof of the last, prices per KWh drop in response, bringing down overall solar installation prices, making the entire activity much more lucrative to us consumers and the producers, and generally makes our world a better place.

There is however a secondary bonus to such procedure - competition. Hundreds or private, multinational and lab groups are striving to be the team with the highest efficiency, whether it be for their individual solar cells, or the entire panel. This competition is what drives records to be broken, almost on a daily basis. The latest addition to the list is quite a big one.

Semprius, a large solar-module producing company which has been awarded multiple large sums of money by the NERL and DOE for its advances in the industry, has in its latest project cranked the bar up to 33.9%, beating back the original world record of 32%. They have achieved “unmatched efficiency and performance” by creating a solar cell the size of a pencil point (another world record), allowing an unheard of amount of sunlight-electricity generation.

Many are touting the company as a success story of the highest order in terms of government-backed solar funding and subsidies, which comes at a time where many solar bankruptcies have tarnished the industry’s reputation. Although it is too early to mark this down as a complete success just yet, the progress Semprius has made is certainly admirable, and worthy of further investment.

Read More →

I read an article recently written by Olivier De Schutter, the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food (via the Guardian) in which he outlined how the issue of climate change, and the myriad critical, human-related problems associated with it, should be brought up to the status of a human rights issue - by damaging our climate and endangering our societies, we are actively ignoring a basic human right. Well that’s the premise at least.

As we all know, climate change, whether it be natural or man-made, or more than likely a complex combination of both, is directly affecting every human on the globe and is a severe problem we are in desperate need of fixing.

The advent of multiple climate conventions and meetings of world powers began decades ago and still continues on today, but they’re becoming more and more like a session in the House of Commons or a high-school debate than a truly successful stage for solving the issues. Each nation leader has their own opinion and they’re not afraid to shout it loudly to the rest of the world, most of the time in contention with almost everyone else in the room. 

We are quick to finger those developed and rapidly developing states which act almost to stagger climate decisions, such as Canada, the US or China to name a few, but in all reality, it’s the whole crowd. As De Schutter suggests in his article, “does this mean that democracy has failed, and must be sacrificed for authoritarian solutions?”. While it may seem that our democratic way of debating and considering things has done little to affect response to climate change, I feel it is still a premature idea to condemn the process altogether just yet.

The idea of branding the climate issue as a human rights issue thus stems from this, as these rights are global, powerful and upheld by almost every country on the planet, although there is plenty of scope for local tweaks and bending of the rules for evil. However, in a broad sense, De Schutter believes it will bring about a hyper-democratic approach, as climate change affects all those other human rights in which so many depend upon - water, food, electricity, sanitation and development.

Read More →

The recent spate of solar cell improvements and efficiency upgrades has been rapid and unrelenting, with records broken and innovations achieved on an almost daily basis.

This is not surprising given the sudden boom in the sector following generous FiTs (feed-in-tariffs) and investments via governments and host nations, such as Germany or the UK. With money finally flowing in, the science of solar efficiency and panel production has skyrocketed, with similarly impressive new technologies becoming available to the general public. I love it.

The latest in the line of ingenious innovations, heralds from the University of California, Berkeley, and is certainly the most counterintuitive approach to the subject we’ve yet seen. The clever pair Eli Yablonovitch and Owen Miller have devised a way of creating solar cells which emit light, as well as absorbing it, using tried and tested LED technology. Yep, solar panels emitting light, and it works apparently. 

According to the company subsequently set up to employ the new method in solar panels, Alta Devices, based in San Fran constructed prototype cell with efficiencies of 28.3% for a single-junction cell, breaking the current record (yet another). They went on to build the first solar panel, which was verified at 23.5% efficiency by the National Renewable ENergy Laboratory, breaking yet more records; panels retain lower efficiencies due to the extra bits shoved in to make the thing. Not bad for a piece of tech which seems to go against its original purpose of collecting light. 

So How Does This Actually Work - What Magic Is Involved?

It would appear that when such solar panels begin emitting light efficiently, the voltage of electricity generated increases, therefore becoming better at its job, according to Eli Yablonovitch, the principal researcher and a Berkeley professor. 

As solar cells have a known ceiling of efficiency sitting around 40%, making the most of what can be converted is key. This limit is due to the amount of light energy which is convertible under the physical laws of the material being used, with the theoretical efficiency of typical crystalline cells just 30%. This is pretty damn close to the Berkeley cell mentioned earlier.

What is also known relatively well, is that luminescent emission and voltage are a pretty comfy pairing, but this had never been applied to solar technology. By stopping extra electrons which aren’t being actively converted from getting ‘lost’ within the crystalline structure, voltages increase, and that’s the simple crux of it. Improving other aspects of the cell which aid these lost electrons in finding their way also ramps up generation, such as increasing the rear mirror reflectivity, which sends photons back out of the cell.

Considering this technology can be applied to pretty much all solar panels out there, it’s a huge leap forward in the solar race. We could be just years away from 3D, LED-emitting solar cells which absorb well over 90% of incident light (a.k.a the black cells recently developed) and achieve efficiencies at the very edge of theoretical ranges. 

Then there would be no need for any of that dirty fossil fuel jazz right?

http://home.howstuffworks.com/solar-light2.htm

http://cleantechnica.com/2012/04/23/solar-cell-that-shines-in-order-to-produce-more-electricity-innovative-research-record-breaking-technology/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Well here’s a little fact I didn’t know, and how I didn’t know of this is almost shaming on my part, but I simply have to share it. That little ice-bound island sitting astride the mid-Atlantic ridge, which occasionally spews out a handful of ash big enough to shutdown our air-space, is touting a fully green energy mix; that’s right, Iceland is 100% renewable, and has been for a fair amount of time.

At this moment, Iceland generates its entire electricity needs via hydro and geothermal sources, with not a fossil fuel powered plant to speak of or point angrily at. Not only this, but their electricity prices are amongst the most competitive in Europe, with many of their price guarantees and policies locking in enticing costs for both the customer and the provider. It’s practically the perfect environment for judging how well an entirely renewable mix can work.

Not only that, it gets better and better. Iceland’s freezing climate may put many off from visiting the eclectic nation, but for power hungry energy companies, it’s the golden setting. With cold winds and temperatures abundant all year round, huge hosting and data centres can be efficiently cooled purely through the action of wall vents and the odd open window. Because of this, electricity slurping climate controls don’t need to be employed, enticing big names such as Verne Global to the little country.

Now many of the reasons for renewables dominating the Icelandic mix are down to its Goldilocks geographical location, and relatively small population of just 320,000. With abundant volcano-fuelled thermal energy year-round, with glacial meltwater streams, rivers and lakes, they simply don’t need anything else; combine this with a small population and you’re onto a winner.

The only real issue to us wannabe green-nations, is that it still doesn’t really offer us a viable look into the renewable world available that we want. Geothermal is relatively limited worldwide, especially to Europe and Asia, and a large majority of the current hydro energy is already tapped, with a strong social stigma attached to further damming. Our focus is on solar, wind and marine energies, of which Iceland employs none of, so in that respect, we can’t begin basing our own future policies on the Icelandics; but that’s a minor niggle, they’re sorted.

In coming years, Iceland desperately hopes that their intense slant towards green energy and smart low-carbon techniques will draw in an ever-growing number of multi-national companies and professionals craving renewable energies to power up it’s economy and quell the 6% unemployment rate hanging over their heads.

It looks like it’s already began, so from now on I will most certainly be keeping an eye on this silently forward-looking island of the Atlantic.

http://www.ecomagination.com/iceland-attracts-new-business-with-clean-energy

After just 14 months of preparation and the collaboration of 21 countries, the Indian state of Gujurat has just turned on the world’s largest solar powered plant, to the tune of $2.3 billion and a 600MW generating capacity. Given its size, this is more of a solar-city than a mere plant, coming in at 5,000 acres, producing as much energy as a well-oiled (forgive the pun) fossil fuel plant or nuclear reactor.

With the advent of this new addition to the grid, India plans of powering forward into the renewable future with goals of 15% by 2020, with current values sitting around the 6% mark. Now that’s not nearly as ambitious as some of the other keen-on-green nations, such as Denmark’s wild 100% mix by 2050, or the 30%-40% goals of the UK, Germany or other Scandinavian players, but it’s a huge step in the right direction. 

Given India’s stance on the global stage in the last climate talks, touting itself as a solar leader with the technology to back its claims, it would finally seem things are coming to fruition. Further investment of $400 million has been laid out for promotion and advancements, and residential solar is being pushed as the next step for India. 

Unfortunately, this latest project pales in comparison to the TuNur proposal in Tunisia, part of the DESERTEC initiative focused on building solar plants in the African deserts. This whopping 2GW plant will dwarf even the Gujarat attempt, and plans to be complete by 2016. This plant however takes the form of a concentrated solar power generator, whereby panels direct sunlight onto a single collecting tower, producing intense heats to boil water and spin turbines. 

The one question that does arise in reading these, to me at least, is that of how many more similar builds can be undertaken before space becomes a serious issue? In countries devoid of deserts of wide open, flat spaces (think Japan, SE Asia or many EU nations), there is unlikely to be room for multiple builds in similar scale to the Indian or Tunisian effort, and unless urban spaces are integrated fluidly, it’s a real stumbling block. 

However, considering the rapidity at which solar efficiency is rising, and the introduction of tech like the ‘black’ cells, which can capture near-100% of the sunlight, or 3D panels which double or triple conversion rates, similarly powerful plants could become smaller and smaller. 

Anyway, you only need to look at this below image to see that us humans have PLENTY of solar energy at our disposal, we just need to actually use it!

http://www.solarfeeds.com/solar-in-india-the-biggest-energy-opportunity-of-the-21st-century/

http://cleantechnica.com/2012/04/18/in-14-and-a-half-seconds/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

http://grist.org/list/india-flips-the-switch-on-worlds-largest-solar-power-plant/

http://cleantechnica.com/2012/04/20/worlds-largest-solar-pv-power-plant-added-to-indias-grid/

Yet another oil spill 230 miles off the coast Rio de Janeiro, Brazil highlights once again how unstable the offshore oil drilling industry is, and how increasingly likely events like these seem to be coming. Not only was this particular spill reported in the same region as last years Chevron incident, it was seen to be due to what are known as exudations, or deep-sea fissures venting the oil. 

These usually form under the high pressures of the drilling process, and are the respective company’s responsibility to keep plugged, although clearly that was not the case here. Chevron was appropriately fined for the accident on their watch, but in all likelihood, a meagre fine will do nothing but scratch the multi-national conglomerate’s finances. This is just one of many issues with the offshore oil industry.

Given how common these incidents seem to be coming, with the devastating BP Deepwater Horizon spill of 2010 and subsequent 3 months spent attempting to fix the situation, alongside literally 10s of similar, if not lower magnitude accidents happening each year across the globe, there is no shortage of case studies to throw at the fossil fuel industry. 

What I find even more distressing, is that many of the largest ever recorded spills, causing untold ecosystem damage and millions to billions of dollars to clean up, have happened in the early stages of the industry, during the 70s-90s period, including the famous Exxon-Valdez spill of 1989. Clearly, the industry has been a verifiably unstable and dangerous venture since its inception, and yet even today, companies are spending further billions to scout out new deep-sea reserves for drilling. 

Now I understand that a transition away from this highly damaging and expensive fuel will not happen over night, or even over months years, but decades maybe, and that’s the unfortunate truth. Surely however, seeing how often these spills ruin ecosystems and marine environments is enough to make even us shortsighted humans think twice?

Read More →

I may be slightly behind on the news of this project, but it wasn’t until a recent lecture at my university on the state of global hydrocarbon reserves and extraction techniques, that I learnt of the proposed, and I believe now accepted Mackenzie Valley Pipeline, a massive 1,200km long natural gas pipeline running from North Canada to Alberta. I just wanted to highlight a few details regarding the project and its goal, even though the expect completion date has been set at 2014 and may very possibly be old news on the green network.

Due to the huge natural gas resources locked up in the Mackenzie Delta region, 6 trillion cubic feet at best estimates, companies such as Shell, Esso and ExxonMobil have been flocking to the area ever since the discovery of such vast reserves in the early 1970s. A volume of gas this large would be able to comfortably heat every gas-heated Canadian household for 6 years, or every equivalent American abode for a year and half. That is a hell of a lot of gas. 

This gas will be transported south in various forms, namely liquified for quicker mobilisation, or as a gas for the last section of the pipeline, and carries as estimated CAN$7 billion price-tag, which will inevitably be breached. Not only this, but the first section of the line runs through what is ostensibly First Nation’s land, where many of the original aboriginal peoples inhabit today, and whose land has been ravaged by the white-man fossil fuel industry for decades already. 

Because of this, the pipeline was proposed alongside agreement from the Aboriginal Pipeline Group, with the foreign players focusing heavily on the fact that thousands of jobs and a stimulation of the local economy would be priority, of course in return for the ownership and rights to build a whacking great pipeline through (once) pristine Canada and mine the ground to dust. However, considering the pipeline is now going ahead, I would assume the deal was enticing enough for them, but likely just as much a result of bullying into accepting the deal as it was pure acceptance. 

What sticks most in the throat for me though, and in fairness, when put in the context of Canada’s recent environmental movements (out of Kyoto, tar sand priority etc) doesn’t actually surprise me, is what all this gas is being used for. The final destination, is that of NE Alberta, and the Athabasca tar sands. Yep, tar sands. The natural gas is being mainly used to extract oil from the tar sands, I am guessing through the burning of the gas to create the heats necessary to loosen up bitumen oils in the ground, allowing them to flow more easily to the surface. 

As we all know, or should now be aware of, tar sand oil is 2-4 times more damaging and carbon-emmitting than standard oil extraction, and yet using natural gas reserves this large for the same purpose just seems to be kicking the Earth whilst it’s down, like Canada and the participating companies are sticking a middle finger up to climate change. Where this oil goes I’m unsure of, but we can al make our own firm guesses at that, but natural gas for tar sand oil? Doesn’t sound like a fair trade to me. 

That gas should either be left in the ground, along with the tar sand oil, or it should be gradually extracted by the First Nations people as and when they need it, not for Esso or ExxonMobil. Of course, money makes the world go round, and Canada has plenty of scope for that.

http://www.nationalpost.com/related/topics/minister+asks+Ottawa+Mackenzie+pipeline+support/1719003/story.html

The controversial gas-extraction method known as ‘fracking’ has been given a potential green light to continue operations in the UK after a report by DECC was released today detailing concerns over two recent earthquakes linked to the industry. These admittedly tiny quakes (1.5 and 2.3), centred around Blackpool, caused little to no superficial damage and were undetectable to you or I, but did not sit well with the public and their perceptions of the method, and have since been linked to possible damage of more sensitive infrastructures, such as nuclear plants or train lines. 

Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, attempts to access reserves of shale-gas, a form of the fossil fuel which is trapped within rocks deep in the Earth’s surface. By drilling wells over 1km into the surface and pumping water, sand and chemicals (a fair few as well) at very high pressures, fracturing of the rock occurs, which is held open by the sand particles, allowing the trapped gas to diffuse into the wells and up to the surface. Through this, gas reserves previously unavailable become relatively easy to extract, and has effectible transformed the US energy market, who now produce vast quantities of the stuff.

Many of these chemicals have been linked with health and environmental issues, such as the famously viral video portraying a resident in the US lighting water pouring from a tap, supposedly tainted with methane from the nearby fracking plant. others have said the process can cause illness, destabilise the ground for miles around and lead to dangerous repercussions, such as quakes which could directly damage fracking wells.

However, many governments, ours included, see it as a potential natural gas resource which should not and cannot be ignored, given the rising costs to the economy and the environment of coal and oil, both of which burn dirtier and produce more carbon than gas. Not only this, but reserves are of course domestic, lowering the importing costs and foreign dependencies of those countries which invest in shale-gas successfully. Considering the power of the phrase ‘domestically-produced energy’ these days, its no surprise many nations are piling money into fracking. 

Read More →

I read an article recently on Grist covering the subject of coal deposits around the world and the hugely troubling issue known as carbon leakage, a stumbling block for both the economy and the climate, with the article going on to detail how this new paper, published in the Journal of Political Economy, could sold the problem once and for all.

At its simplest, carbon leakage is a nasty side-effect of the supply and demand system our capitalist economy runs by, and is a possibility resulting from multiple different ways of dealing with taxing carbon and introducing credits especially. The crux of the issue in regards to this paper, is as follows.

If a ‘climate coalition’, such as the UN or OECD, decides to reduce the demand of coal within its member nations, it is highly likely other non-participating countries will sense the drop in global prices and exploit this readily. Flip this over, and reducing the supply results in practically the same response. Prices will rocket if coalitions cut demand or extraction, ultimately making it much more profitable for said member nations to begin selling coal once again, generating a tidy profit in the process.

“In other words, global fossil-fuel markets are like a big balloon. If one set of countries squeezes consumption or extraction, the balloon just puffs up somewhere else” - David Roberts, Grist

Read More →

Japan is set to make some big steps into the renewable industry from July onwards, with it’s ventures into multiple sources of clean energy production and low-carbon technology. This is a key development after the closure of every single nuclear reactor come May, once providing roughly 1/4 of the country’s energy needs. 

First on the table is a brand new solar FiT (feed-in-tariff), which will hope to incentivise and fund companies and customers desperate for a bit of sunlight-energy in their lives, and will aim to work in much the same way the German and UK FiTs functioned, until the cuts obviously. A major difference however, is that this tariff will force utility companies to purchase electricity from clean sources at predetermined prices, and this will have to be passed down to the customer, in the form of a slightly fatter bill through the letterbox. 

This is one of the primary hurdles which must be jumped in order to put this tariff into place, as many ministers and analysts will struggle to pin down an appropriate price which can be nationally distributed without anger and reprisal from the public. On the other hand, the Japanese are known for their obedience and rational thinking in situations like this, and so I feel that once a price is set, both utilities and customers will work together to make the FiT work efficiently. 

Various projects are in the planning and finance stages, ranging from a whopping 340MW plant in Hokkaido, to a 70MW construction which will stretch out across part of Kagoshima Bay and all it’s shiny glory. Many other smaller projects round the proposed sum up at almost 0.5GW of solar energy.

Read More →

I want to start off just by saying, I’m not talking about everybody here, just the unfortunate reality that it is a common theme amongst us humans, and let’s not beat around the bush, us Westerners, that vanity truly gets in the way of rational thinking. 

Whilst reading a rather nice little article on Solar Feeds about the pros and cons of wind and solar energy, a particular con struck a chord with me. Both lists included the ‘looks’ factor, with both wind turbines and rooftop solar panels deemed potentially ugly or unattractive in light of the surrounding beauty of nature and the housing or garden they may reside on. Because of this apparent ugliness, many see that as a negative aspect, and decline the chance to produce some good clean energy, without environmental cost. Shocking eh? Not really.

This is by no means a new thing, I’m just bringing it up as I felt rather strongly about it when reading about it today, and my brain wanders easily. It is this vanity and constant desire of society to keep everything looking ‘nice’ and ‘attractive’ that is seriously hindering the renewable industry in my opinion. We refuse to put up solar panels or wind turbines on the grounds of them being an eyesore, despite the completely obvious benefits each and every one provides.

Let’s take for example, the humble solar panel and the cheap-as-chips wind turbine. Both produce clean, effectively free and guiltless energy for us and the grid, without the slightest hint of dirty pollution or damage to the environment, and can run on endless resources with no extra payment or attention needed on our part. The same goes for marine, tidal or offshore wind, all of which just keep on giving without taking. 

Read More →

The UK government has, as of Tuesday, signed a deal with Japan to lease its expertise in nuclear decommissioning and waste clean-up, in return for knowledge from some of the world’s greatest builders of nuclear reactors. 

The United Kingdom has always been good at what is in all fairness, a very dirty and taboo industry, that of managing nuclear waste and disposing of it as safely and environmentally friendly as possible, with 19 sites currently active in the sector. It’s an odd expertise to have given the relatively small presence of nuclear in the country, but it’s nonetheless a lucrative and much-needed business to be in, with over 10,000 cubic metres of radioactive waste produced annually. 

Albeit, it was until the recent spate of nuclear fear and money issues caused the closing of hundreds of plants worldwide and the pulling out of major builds, including in the UK itself, as governments rethought their stance on the splitting of atoms. I mentioned very briefly in a post earlier in this blog’s lifetime that the shying away of the world from nuclear would likely harm our prospects as the ‘glowing-green’ waste cleaners of the globe, and could lose us a lot of money. 

Whether this was the case I am unsure, but this new agreement may come at a time when money and foreign expertise is in high demand. The deal will allow the Japanese to offload much of the waste and ready-to-be decommissioned plants it has left over from the closure of all 54 of its sites (last to shut this May) following Fukushima to the UK, which will stick it somewhere in the ground and aid in controlling the resultant radioactivity. 

In return, we get the technical expertise and knowledge of the Japanese nuclear industry, who will help build newer, cleaner, more efficient reactors in both nations, with a multi-billion pound price-tag at stake. Considering the Japanese have some of the most advanced reactor designs (that’s not including the 1960s Fukushima-Daiichi plant) and the fact that a large gap in energy production must be filled now that RWE and e.on have bailed from their UK build, it seems like a deal laden with positives.

Read More →