MapMPG – How Far will a Gallon of Gas Take You?
How far you can travel on a gallon of gas? What if you improved your mileage by 20%? What if you bought a new car – how does that compare to your existing car? This isn’t hard to figure out, and FuelClinic.com will do this for you, but what if you wanted to see what this looks like on a map?
Today I received an interesting note from Jay Hoffman at ESRI about a new website they are beta testing called MapMPG.com
ESRI has an interesting new web site called MapMPG.com that maps the distance two different cars can drive on one gallon of gas. This rather unique and useful application compares the mpg’s on your specific neighborhood streets.
I compared my 2001 Toyota Tacoma to a newer Toyota Prius to produce this map of my local area.
Select one vehicle as Vehicle 1, and another as Vehicle 2, enter a street address and zip code, and you’ll see a graphic representation of how far you can get on one gallon of gas, based on the roads in your area.Â
Right now the site uses EPA estimated MPG figures for each vehicle, but Mr. Hoffman indicated that his team is seeking comments and may be able to modify the interface to be more usable.
ESRI is a world-leader in digital mapping for large organizations and government agencies, and has been doing scientific GIS and mapping long before anyone else.Â
What do you think? Comments are open.
The Case for “Future-Proof” Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFVs)
Over the next few year you’ll see a change at your local gas stations as more alcohol-blended fuel pumps are installed across the nation. Alcohol-blended fuels like E85 are already available in some areas, and more are coming to market as more FFVs are sold in the United States.
US based manufacturers have committed to making 50% of their new autos FFVs by 2010 and and 85% by 2012. In addition, there is proposed legislation called the Open Fuel Standard Act which will mandate all cars sold in America meet the same goals, so this will mean that all imports sold in the US will meet the same FFV standard. (You can help support this legislation here.)
Since FFV is an widely available and mature technology (there are already millions of FFVs on the road in the US – you may be driving one), adding the capability to all new vehicles sold in the US doesn’t add notably to the cost of making new cars (usually about $100) – and provides a way for auto manufactures to “green-up” their product lines.
Drivers of FFVs will be able to choose what fuel to buy, based on price at the pump, performance needs, personal preference, etc. – just like shopping for any other commodity. You’ll be able to mix E85 with E10 (the current flavor of gasoline almost everywhere in the US) and newer alternative blends like E25 or M50. Using FFV technology, your car will automatically adjust your engines settings to run properly on any combination of gasoline and alcohol fuels.
Unlike more exotic alternative fuels like compressed hydrogen or natural gas, drivers of FFVs are not stuck on a virtual “energy island” of specialized refueling stations. You will be able to travel freely, just like today, as far and wide as you like – choosing your favorite blend of alcohol fuels as you go – or using straight gasoline where no other choice exists.
So if your next car has an engine that burns liquid fuel, makes sure it is “future proof” and check that it’s a Flex-Fuel Vehicle before you buy it, or else you’ll be left without options at the pump when the alcohol-blended fuels hit the wider market.
Remarks by Governor Sarah Palin on Achieving Strategic Energy Independence
October 29, 2008
ARLINGTON, VA — Governor Sarah Palin today will deliver the following remarks as prepared for delivery in Toledo, OH, at 9:00 a.m. ET:
Thank you all very much. I appreciate the hospitality of Xunlight Energy, and all the people of Toledo. The folks at Xunlight are doing great work for this community and our country.
Every day, when there are no cameras around to draw attention to it, this company and others like it are engaged in the great enterprise of energy independence. And what we see here is just a glimpse of much bigger things to come. Solar power is one of many alternative energy sources that are changing our economy for the better. And one day they will change our economy forever.
All who work in pursuit of new and clean energy sources understand that America’s energy problems do not go away when oil and gasoline prices fall, as they have in recent weeks. Oil today is running about 64 dollars a barrel — less than half of what it was just a couple of months ago. And though this sudden drop in prices sure makes a difference for families across America, the dangers of our dependence on foreign oil are just as they were before.
The price of oil is declining largely because of the market’s expectation of a broad recession that would lower demand. This is hardly a good sign of things to come, and should only add to our sense of urgency in gaining energy independence. When our economy recovers, and growth once again creates new demand, we could run into the same brick wall of rising oil and gasoline prices — and now is the time to make sure that doesn’t happen. In Washington, we can view this period of lower oil prices as just one more chance to make excuses — and on the problem of energy security, we’ve heard enough excuses. Or we can view it as an opportunity to finally confront the problem.
In reality, volatile oil prices are just the most immediate consequence when foreign powers control our energy supplies. They are an economic symptom of a strategic problem. And prices will stabilize only when we have reached the great goal of energy security for America.
Achieving this objective will require a clean break not just from the energy policies of the current administration, but from thirty years’ worth of failed policies in Washington. As in other challenges that confront our nation, we must shape events, and not simply manage crises. We must steer far clear of the errors and false assumptions that have marked the energy policies of nearly twenty Congresses and seven presidents. Some tasks will be the work of decades, and some the work of years. And they all will begin in the term of the next president.
For our part, John McCain and I are determined to set this country firmly on a path toward energy independence. America has the resources to achieve this vital goal. We certainly have the ingenuity. And if John McCain and I are elected, we will supply the political will to finally get it done.
In my experiences in Alaska, I have seen what American ingenuity can achieve if given a chance. As governor of a huge energy-producing state, and as chair of our state’s oil and gas conservation commission, and chairman of the nation’s Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission, I’ve also seen how political pressures, special interests, and corporate abuses can work against the clear public interest in expanding our domestic energy supplies.
Alaska is the one of the most resource-rich places on earth. Yet for many years, our state’s oil and gas wealth was the carefully guarded preserve of the political establishment — the good ol’ boys — rewarded by a few big oil companies and through an oil services company that liked things just the way they were. As you may have seen in the news this week, Alaska’s senior senator is not the first man to discover the hazards of getting too close to moneyed interests with agendas of their own.
For the people of Alaska and their representatives, it had been hard enough to persuade Congress to authorize construction of the original Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline. And when Congress finally acted in 1973, it approved the pipeline over the “No” votes of five senators, including a freshmen senator named Joe Biden.
For the next three decades, there had been talk of building another pipeline to transport cleaner, greener natural gas down to the Lower 48. But that’s all it ever amounted to — talk. And one of the main obstacles was big oil itself — ExxonMobil and other companies.
They should have been competing to invest in a new means of delivering their product to market. Instead, they wanted a higher price than fair competition would yield. They were holding out for more billions of dollars — in public money. No one in good conscience could pay them what they wanted to build that pipeline. And that’s how we found things when I became governor: No progress, no pipeline, no gas revenue for Alaska, no added energy security for America.
So we introduced the big oil companies and their lobbyists to a concept some of them had forgotten — free-market competition. They had a monopoly on power and resources, and we broke it.
The result is, finally, progress on the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history — a nearly forty billion dollar natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence. When the last section is laid and its valves are opened, that pipeline will lead America one step farther away from reliance on foreign energy. That pipeline will be a lifeline — freeing us from debt, dependence, and the influence of foreign powers that do not have our interests at heart.
We’ve shaken things up in Juneau. Whatever the good ol’ boys are running these days, it’s not the State of Alaska. And that’s the kind of serious reform that we need in Washington, because the stakes for our country could not be higher.
Energy security is one of the great questions in this election. It tests our ability to confront and solve hard problems in Washington, instead of constantly putting things off. And it brings together so many other issues — from the value of our pay checks to our nation’s most vital interests abroad. Americans blame Washington for doing next to nothing about our energy problems, and they are right.
Abroad, we see Russia with designs on a vital pipeline in the Caucasus. Its strategy is to divide and intimidate our European allies by using energy as a weapon. And there, as elsewhere, we cannot leave ourselves at the mercy of foreign suppliers.
To confront the threat that Iran might seek to cut off nearly a fifth of world’s oil supplies … or that terrorists might strike at a vital refining facility in Saudi Arabia … or that Venezuela might shut off its oil deliveries … we Americans need to produce more of our own oil and gas.
In the worst cases, some of the world’s most oil-rich nations are also the most oppressive societies. And whether we like it or not, the money we pay for their oil only makes them more powerful and more oppressive. Oil wealth allows undemocratic governments to crush dissent and to subjugate women. Other regimes use it to finance terrorists around the world and criminal syndicates in our own hemisphere.
By relying upon oil from the Middle East, we not only provide wealth to the sponsors of terror — we provide high-value targets to the terrorists themselves. Across the world are pipelines, refineries, transit routes, and terminals for the oil we rely on. And Al Qaeda terrorists know where they are.
As if all this weren’t bad enough, there is also the damage that our dependence on foreign oil inflicts on our economy. Over the years, trillions of dollars have flowed out of our country, often to nations or regimes hostile to our country. Through this massive transfer of wealth, we lose hundreds of billions of dollars a year that would be better invested in American enterprises to create American jobs.
All of this explains why, as Senator McCain has said, energy security is not just one more issue on the candidate questionnaire. Energy security is the sum total of so many problems that confront our nation. It demands of us that we shake off old ways, negotiate new hazards, and make hard choices long deferred. And three decades of partisan paralysis on energy security is enough. It’s time we meet this challenge in a way consistent with the character of our nation, and that starts with producing more of our own energy.
In a McCain administration, we will authorize and support new exploration and production of America’s own oil and gas reserves — because we cannot outsource the solution to America’s energy problem. Every year, we are sending hundreds of billions of dollars out of the country for oil imports, much of it from OPEC, while America’s own oil and gas reserves in America go unused. And take it from a gal who knows the North Slope of Alaska: we’ve got lots of both.
As a matter of fairness, we must assure affordable fuel for America by producing more of the trillions of dollars’ worth of our oil and natural gas. On land and offshore, we will drill here and drill now!
Another essential means to energy independence is a dramatic expansion in our use of nuclear energy. In a McCain administration, we will set this nation on a course to build 45 new reactors by the year 2030. And we will set the goal of 100 new plants to power the homes and factories and cities of America.
This task will be as difficult as it is necessary. We will need to recover all the knowledge and skills that have been lost over three stagnant decades in a highly technical field. We will need to solve complex problems of moving and storing materials that will always need safeguarding. We will need to do all of these things, and do them right, as we have done great things before.
One of the efforts that will assist in securing our energy future is the development of clean-coal technology. And here we have another big disagreement with our opponents. Last month Joe Biden told a voter — and I quote — “we’re not supporting clean coal.” He says clean coal’s a good idea for China — but sorry, Ohio, Joe Biden says it’s not for you.
That’s just nonsense, and there’s plenty more of it in Senator Biden’s record. He’s against drilling off our coasts, for environmental reasons. But he says that offshore drilling holds real promise for the island nation of Cyprus — as if the environmental safeguards of the Cypriots are more rigorous than our own. And so far as he and Senator Obama are concerned, nuclear power’s okay, too — but only for France and other European nations. Our opponents seem to have all sorts of solutions for the energy needs of other nations — now if only they’d focus more on what America needs.
It’s worth asking why Senators Obama and Biden are opposed to the very same production methods in America that they advocate for other nations. Usually, the answer we hear is that they fear environmental harm from domestic production, especially in the case of offshore drilling. But there’s a big problem here, even if we take their argument on its own terms. Technology has made production far cleaner than was once thought possible — by use of such methods as horizontal drilling, carbon capture and storage, and enhanced recovery. And those cleaner, safer technologies are far likelier to be used in the United States and Canada than by China, India, or other developing nations.
So policies that forego domestic production don’t protect our environment. They simply accelerate and reward dirtier and more dangerous methods of production elsewhere, in countries that apply few if any environmental safeguards. While our opponents like to posture as defenders of the environment, in practice their refusal to support more domestic production does more harm than good.
As for our coal resources, America has more coal than the oil riches of Saudi Arabia. Burning coal cleanly is a challenge of practical problem-solving and human ingenuity — and we have no shortage of those in America either. So, in a McCain administration, we will commit two billion dollars each year, until 2024, to clean-coal research, development, and deployment. We will refine the techniques and equipment. We will deliver not only electricity but jobs to some of the areas hardest hit by our economic troubles.
And in the end, with or without the green light from Joe the Six-Term Senator, we will make clean coal a reality. For the sake of our nation’s security and our prosperity, we need American energy resources, brought to you by American ingenuity, and produced by American workers.
To meet America’s great energy challenge, John and I will adopt an “all of the above” approach. In our administration, that will mean harnessing alternative sources of energy, like wind and solar. We will end subsidies and tariffs that drive prices up, and provide tax credits indexed to low automobile carbon emissions. We will encourage Americans to be part of the solution by taking steps in their everyday lives that conserve more and use less. And we will control greenhouse gas emissions by giving American businesses new incentives and new rewards to seek, instead of just giving them new taxes to pay and new orders to follow.
On energy policy, our opponents are always talking about things we cannot do, because our own government won’t let us. When you look over the energy plans of Barack Obama and his allies in Congress, it’s just a long, labored agenda of inaction. And it’s the same agenda of inaction we could expect under the one-party rule of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid. They’re always talking about things we can’t do in America, energy we can’t produce, refineries we can’t build, plants we can’t approve, coal we cannot use, technologies we cannot master. As John McCain has observed, for a guy’s who’s slogan is “Yes, we can,” Barack Obama’s energy plan sure has a whole lot of “No we can’t.”
Again and again, our opponents say that drilling will not solve all of America’s energy problems — as if we all didn’t know that already. But the fact that drilling won’t solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all.
No, we can’t “drill our way out of the problem” entirely. But this is America, the most resourceful country on earth, and we can drill, and refine, and mine, enrich, reprocess, invent, build, conserve, grow, and use every available means to regain our independence.
The mission of energy security will demand great things of our country. It will require commitment, resolve, and political courage. And John McCain is a man who knows something about hard missions, about overcoming dangers and keeping faith with his country. The stakes are high, and complete success will not come quickly. But I can promise you this: Unless we begin this mission now, the only change we’ll see is a change for the worse. And when we do succeed in the hard work ahead, our children will live in a more prosperous country, in a more peaceful world. Thank you all very much, and God bless America.
###
KillerStartups Reviews: FuelClinic.com
FuelClinic.com was recently reviewed at KillerStartups.com, a website that collects information about young web startups and publishes short reviews. People can show their support by “voting” for their favorite site – just click the “+” sign under the vote tally near the top left side of the page. Sites with more votes get more prominently displayed.
Turning Oil into Salt
I’m home from the Energy Freedom Summit in Chicago with so much material and information that it’ll take me weeks to digest, understand, summarize, and disseminate it to you. Let me start with a “sound-bite” sized summary of the theme of the conference…
Once was a time when nations went to war over salt. Seriously.
Until the 19th century salt was a strategic commodity much like oil is today. Salt was required to preserve meat – and preserved meat was required to allow armies to march. Salt was required for societies to grow beyond traditional collectives, and salt was required to store, transport, and sell meat that could not be consumed immediately. Wars were indeed fought over salt, and those nations with large salt reserves had tremendous political and economic prosperity – and power over those who needed their salt – much like countries with oil do today.
So, what happened to change the world, and strip salt of it’s strategic importance?
New technologies were invented which made salt unnecessary for food preservation. The invention of electricity, refrigeration, canning, and other preservative technologies forever changed the world, and salt became just another freely traded commodity like we are accustomed to today.
You can still preserve your meats with salt if you wanted to, but most choose to refrigerate it.
Today we find ourselves in a 19th-century dilemma again, where oil has replaced salt as a global strategic commodity, and where the trade in this commodity is tightly controlled in order to weild political and economic power.
Oil’s strategic value stems from it’s monopoly in the transportation sector. This monopoly gives the petrocrats that control OPEC and the bulk of world oil reserves unacceptable power over the global economy.
How exactly can we “turn oil into salt”. The answer is surprisingly simple and familiar – by using technology to provide fuel choice thru Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFV) and plug-in hybrid w/ FFV engines or new 100% electric vehicles (EV).
“Future-Proof” Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFVs) keep to a liquid-fuels based technology that is no different from the norm today. The element of “choice” is created by allowing drivers to decide what type of fuel to consume, with options ranging from straight gasoline (no change from existing habits) to a variety of blends of alcohol/gasoline like E25, E85, M50. FFV technology does not restrict auto manufactures in any way – they can make any variety of vehicle they’d want, from scooters to Hummers.
Plug-in Hybrids w/ FFV engines (similar to the Prius Plug-In) move the hybrid technology forward by decoupling the vehicle from the gasoline pump. With a plug-in hybrid, you can choose to recharge your car using your residential electricity. For distances greater than your battery capacity, your hybrid will switch to using it’s FFV engine, where you’ll have the same fuel options of non-hybrid FFV’s.
Electric Vehicles (EVs) (like these from an auto show earlier this year) are quite different and have no engine and require no liquid fuels on board. Instead they have bigger and better batteries and electric motor(s) which meet commuting needs of most Americans, and are recharged at home or at specialized recharging stations around town. This option allows a “no-oil” choice, as your car is recharged by the power grid. (The power grid is of course fueled somehow, in the U.S. usually natural gas, hydro-electric, coal or nuclear.)
At this point, when there are a variety of ways to power your vehicle, gasoline will have to compete with other forms of fuel that are not completely controlled by “big-oil”. As in Brazil, market forces will control costs and create a vigorous new-energy economy. Consumers decide what fuel to buy, based on a variety of reasons they get to determine.
When consumers have a choice and a real alternative to replace 100% gasoline, oil will no longer be a strategic commodity and it will be forced to be valued competitively, just like salt.
Once Bitten… Will Americans Continue to Conserve Fuel?
As oil prices continue to slide away from the peak crude costs earlier this year, and as the price at the pump lags downward, will American’s forget the hard lessons of the summer’s high fuel prices and lapse back into the sleepy denial of the true nature of our current energy crisis?Â
Judging from recently released data from US DoT, the ”mileage bubble” has yet to burst.Â
The U.S. Department of Transportation said Friday that Americans drove 5.6 percent less, or 15 billion fewer miles, in August compared with same month a year ago—the biggest single monthly decline since the data was first collected regularly in 1942.
But it’s not uncommon for market factors like these to lag behind one another. As fuel prices start to look “cheap” again to your average American driver, will they start forgetting the pain of $4+ gasoline?
Many experts I spoke with at the Energy Freedom Summit in Chicago believe that these lowered prices are very temporary, and that our energy strategy is so inherently weak that almost any “glitch”, storm, or supply chain attack will send prices soaring, probably beyond the record highs of this summer.
Robert McFarlane, former National Security Advisor for Ronald Reagan, went as far as to predict a massive attack on oil infrastructure in the next six months that would cause crude oil costs to soar over $200 per barrel, and cement the looming world recession, noting that a 5% cut in current production would mean oil would cost about $200/bbl.
While not everyone agrees with the certainty of the event, most did agree that should such an event occur, the damage to world population would be devastating – especially to the parts of the world where higher oil costs mean starvation and death, in addition to here in the West where it will mean job-loss and economic hardship or ruin for many.Â
It’s my hope that the oil market have overplayed it’s hand with the American people, and that the lessons of the summer of ‘08 will not be quickly forgotten.Â
What do you think? Comments are open…Â
OPEC Cuts Production, Oil Prices Continue Slide
SINGAPORE (AP) – Oil prices fell to 17-month lows at $63 a barrel Monday in Asia as investors weighed Friday’s OPEC output cut against growing evidence of a severe global economic slowdown that would undermine crude demand. Light, sweet crude for December delivery fell 32 cents to $63.83 a barrel in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange by midday in Singapore. Investors brushed off a 1.5 million barrel-a-day cut announced by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries on Friday, focusing instead on falling crude demand as economies across the globe reel from the impact of a credit crisis. On Friday, oil fell $3.69 to settle at $64.15. Prices have plunged 57 percent from a record $147.27 on July 11.
Energy Freedom Summit – First Impressions
Today and tomorrow I’m in Chicago attending the Energy Freedom Summit, organized by the Set America Free Coalition. I wasn’t sure what to expect from this summit, not knowing much about the organization until just two months ago.
 My first impression after today’s panels; I’m impressed with the knowledge, experience, focus and pace of this organization – they have a laser-lock on what they intend to do, and are efficient in getting the message out as powerfully as possible.
The panels are impressive leaders in their fields, from geo-political security experts to plug-in hybrid magazine editors. I’m taking many notes.
The attendees are an ambitious and eclectic group of people from a variety of backgrounds who are interested in understanding and solving the current energy crisis. Authors, government officials past and present, entrepreneurs, concerned citizens fill the conference hall – about 150 in all.
I’ve met several authors, a frog farmer, a history professor, a few lawyers, and several “regular joes” who are attending in an effort to ”do something” about this problem.Â
I’m not yet sure where I fit in here, but I keep talking to people, and am learning quite a lot.
(Update 10/27/08 – I’m home from Chicago, with enough new information to fill this blog for weeks. I’m currently writing a few entries, and will begin posting them as they are completed.)
Supply and Demand: Oil Prices Dropping
 You’ve probably noticed oil and gas prices are the lowest they’ve been all year. Demand has slipped not just here at home, but around the world. Even China’s demand is showing signs of cooling.
Source: IHT.comÂ
At the beginning of the year, OPEC producers felt confident that strong economic growth and tight supplies would keep oil prices high. When oil crossed the $100-a-barrel threshold in February, the cartel’s president blamed speculators and said there was not much OPEC could do.
But now, panic is gripping producers as prices drop. Oil is down by half since July, and the speed of the decline has stunned oil-rich governments that have become dependent on high prices.
OPEC is worried that prices are going to slip too far. This, of course is great news for consumers, who have been suffering for months paying balooning prices at the pump. It’s also a confirmation that basic rules of supply and demand still work to determine the cost of commodities like fuel. Of course lower fuel prices would be even more welcome if not for the global economic downturn.
Were fuel prices a contributor to the economic crisis - a perfect storm of the housing credit and oil bubbles? I’m sure that high fuel prices helped push consumer confidence down. How can you be optimistic about weathering your other economic problems when every day the price of fuel rises, and never seems to fall. High fuel costs may have pushed us over the economic edge we have be teetering at for the last few years.
Early in the year there were numerous reports from government transportation agencies and commercial groups like AAA that Americans were curtailing driving, driving less that they had the year before, indicating the first decrease in driving in decades. In any case, the oil market is finally reacting to months of run-ups, where we found ourselves paying over $140 for a barrel of oil just a few short months ago. We stopped buying as much, and the price slips.
Now OPEC, the largest oil cartel, may attempt to flex its muscle to prop up falling oil prices and protect their profits, by purposely reducing oil supply.Â
Is it possible to demonstrate more clearly the need to find alternative supplies for energy than this? Is it possible to demonstrate more clearly the effect of energy conservation than this? We all participated in the grandest supply and demand experiment of modern history.
Conservation works – and works quickly, without any new technology required. Finding alternative sources of energy, or just stating the intention of finding alternative sources of oil, also works to reduce prices. It doesn’t take years, as predicted by politicians from each side. Speculators and cartels are discouraged when they hear the largest customer has decided to shop around a little. Sellers tend to sweeten the deal in order to keep the customer. It’s less about actual drops of oil, and more about managing human greed. Let’s not be lulled back into old habits by lower prices.
Let’s also remember that relatively small changes in demand led to fairly substantial changes in price. It’s true that Americans are driving less than last year – but it’s only by a small percentage. Look around, there are cars everywhere – moving around all hours of the day. American’s haven’t abandoned their cars, they are just using them a little less, or using them a little more efficiently. I’d like to think we contributed, however slightly.
MJK Racing Qualifies and Races in National Championship
While I was away, Mike Kern of Mike Kern Racing (a SCCA GT-1 racing team that we sponsor), qualified for the SCCA National Championships in Topeka Kansas.
He raced as a rookie nationals driver, starting 17th and moving up to 15th by the end of the race.Â
Mike said in a recent email: “Well the race was a real adventure. We started 17Th out of an 18 car field and finished 15Th., so at least we went the right direction. What a tough race week, if something can go wrong it will, but I glad we went and it created memories for a lifetime.”Â
I wish my wife and I could have been there in person for the race, but we had a wedding to attend (ours!).
We congratulate Mike and his crew for his success in overcoming all obstacles getting to and qualifying for the championship, and look forward to next year’s racing season!
Personal Note…
I’ve been away for two weeks, getting married and honeymooning. The wedding was beautiful, the reception was the best party of my life, and the honeymoon was relaxing and romantic.
The site has been working very well in my total absense, and I’m encouraged by the steady growth and interest. More to follow…
Join The FuelClinic Community
Safer Teen Driving
Spread the Fuelishness!
Watch Fuelishness!
Subscribe to Fuelishness!
|
|
| Even if you don't visit Fuelishness! every day, get the latest via RSS or Email. |
Search Fuelishness!
