Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Anything into Oil (Change trash & sewage to oil for $15@barrel)
DISCOVER Vol. 24 No. 5 ^ | May 2003 | Brad Lemley

Posted on 08/20/2003 6:34:41 AM PDT by ckilmer

DISCOVER Vol. 24 No. 5 (May 2003) Table of Contents

Anything into Oil Technological savvy could turn 600 million tons of turkey guts and other waste into 4 billion barrels of light Texas crude each year By Brad Lemley Photography by Tony Law

Gory refuse, from a Butterball Turkey plant in Carthage, Missouri, will no longer go to waste. Each day 200 tons of turkey offal will be carted to the first industrial-scale thermal depolymerization plant, recently completed in an adjacent lot, and be transformed into various useful products, including 600 barrels of light oil.

In an industrial park in Philadelphia sits a new machine that can change almost anything into oil. Really. "This is a solution to three of the biggest problems facing mankind," says Brian Appel, chairman and CEO of Changing World Technologies, the company that built this pilot plant and has just completed its first industrial-size installation in Missouri. "This process can deal with the world's waste. It can supplement our dwindling supplies of oil. And it can slow down global warming." Pardon me, says a reporter, shivering in the frigid dawn, but that sounds too good to be true. "Everybody says that," says Appel. He is a tall, affable entrepreneur who has assembled a team of scientists, former government leaders, and deep-pocketed investors to develop and sell what he calls the thermal depolymerization process, or TDP. The process is designed to handle almost any waste product imaginable, including turkey offal, tires, plastic bottles, harbor-dredged muck, old computers, municipal garbage, cornstalks, paper-pulp effluent, infectious medical waste, oil-refinery residues, even biological weapons such as anthrax spores. According to Appel, waste goes in one end and comes out the other as three products, all valuable and environmentally benign: high-quality oil, clean-burning gas, and purified minerals that can be used as fuels, fertilizers, or specialty chemicals for manufacturing. Unlike other solid-to-liquid-fuel processes such as cornstarch into ethanol, this one will accept almost any carbon-based feedstock. If a 175-pound man fell into one end, he would come out the other end as 38 pounds of oil, 7 pounds of gas, and 7 pounds of minerals, as well as 123 pounds of sterilized water. While no one plans to put people into a thermal depolymerization machine, an intimate human creation could become a prime feedstock. "There is no reason why we can't turn sewage, including human excrement, into a glorious oil," says engineer Terry Adams, a project consultant. So the city of Philadelphia is in discussion with Changing World Technologies to begin doing exactly that. "The potential is unbelievable," says Michael Roberts, a senior chemical engineer for the Gas Technology Institute, an energy research group. "You're not only cleaning up waste; you're talking about distributed generation of oil all over the world." "This is not an incremental change. This is a big, new step," agrees Alf Andreassen, a venture capitalist with the Paladin Capital Group and a former Bell Laboratories director. The offal-derived oil, is chemically almost identical to a number two fuel oil used to heat homes.

Andreassen and others anticipate that a large chunk of the world's agricultural, industrial, and municipal waste may someday go into thermal depolymerization machines scattered all over the globe. If the process works as well as its creators claim, not only would most toxic waste problems become history, so would imported oil. Just converting all the U.S. agricultural waste into oil and gas would yield the energy equivalent of 4 billion barrels of oil annually. In 2001 the United States imported 4.2 billion barrels of oil. Referring to U.S. dependence on oil from the volatile Middle East, R. James Woolsey, former CIA director and an adviser to Changing World Technologies, says, "This technology offers a beginning of a way away from this." But first things first. Today, here at the plant at Philadelphia's Naval Business Center, the experimental feedstock is turkey processing-plant waste: feathers, bones, skin, blood, fat, guts. A forklift dumps 1,400 pounds of the nasty stuff into the machine's first stage, a 350-horsepower grinder that masticates it into gray brown slurry. From there it flows into a series of tanks and pipes, which hum and hiss as they heat, digest, and break down the mixture. Two hours later, a white-jacketed technician turns a spigot. Out pours a honey-colored fluid, steaming a bit in the cold warehouse as it fills a glass beaker. It really is a lovely oil. "The longest carbon chains are C-18 or so," says Appel, admiring the liquid. "That's a very light oil. It is essentially the same as a mix of half fuel oil, half gasoline." Private investors, who have chipped in $40 million to develop the process, aren't the only ones who are impressed. The federal government has granted more than $12 million to push the work along. "We will be able to make oil for $8 to $12 a barrel," says Paul Baskis, the inventor of the process. "We are going to be able to switch to a carbohydrate economy."

Making oil and gas from hydrocarbon-based waste is a trick that Earth mastered long ago. Most crude oil comes from one-celled plants and animals that die, settle to ocean floors, decompose, and are mashed by sliding tectonic plates, a process geologists call subduction. Under pressure and heat, the dead creatures' long chains of hydrogen, oxygen, and carbon-bearing molecules, known as polymers, decompose into short-chain petroleum hydrocarbons. However, Earth takes its own sweet time doing this—generally thousands or millions of years—because subterranean heat and pressure changes are chaotic. Thermal depolymerization machines turbocharge the process by precisely raising heat and pressure to levels that break the feedstock's long molecular bonds. Many scientists have tried to convert organic solids to liquid fuel using waste products before, but their efforts have been notoriously inefficient. "The problem with most of these methods was that they tried to do the transformation in one step—superheat the material to drive off the water and simultaneously break down the molecules," says Appel. That leads to profligate energy use and makes it possible for hazardous substances to pollute the finished product. Very wet waste—and much of the world's waste is wet—is particularly difficult to process efficiently because driving off the water requires so much energy. Usually, the Btu content in the resulting oil or gas barely exceeds the amount needed to make the stuff. That's the challenge that Baskis, a microbiologist and inventor who lives in Rantoul, Illinois, confronted in the late 1980s. He says he "had a flash" of insight about how to improve the basic ideas behind another inventor's waste-reforming process. "The prototype I saw produced a heavy, burned oil," recalls Baskis. "I drew up an improvement and filed the first patents." He spent the early 1990s wooing investors and, in 1996, met Appel, a former commodities trader. "I saw what this could be and took over the patents," says Appel, who formed a partnership with the Gas Technology Institute and had a demonstration plant up and running by 1999. Thermal depolymerization, Appel says, has proved to be 85 percent energy efficient for complex feedstocks, such as turkey offal: "That means for every 100 Btus in the feedstock, we use only 15 Btus to run the process." He contends the efficiency is even better for relatively dry raw materials, such as plastics. So how does it work? In the cold Philadelphia warehouse, Appel waves a long arm at the apparatus, which looks surprisingly low tech: a tangle of pressure vessels, pipes, valves, and heat exchangers terminating in storage tanks. It resembles the oil refineries that stretch to the horizon on either side of the New Jersey Turnpike, and in part, that's exactly what it is. Appel strides to a silver gray pressure tank that is 20 feet long, three feet wide, heavily insulated, and wrapped with electric heating coils. He raps on its side. "The chief difference in our process is that we make water a friend rather than an enemy," he says. "The other processes all tried to drive out water. We drive it in, inside this tank, with heat and pressure. We super-hydrate the material." Thus temperatures and pressures need only be modest, because water helps to convey heat into the feedstock. "We're talking about temperatures of 500 degrees Fahrenheit and pressures of about 600 pounds for most organic material—not at all extreme or energy intensive. And the cooking times are pretty short, usually about 15 minutes." Once the organic soup is heated and partially depolymerized in the reactor vessel, phase two begins. "We quickly drop the slurry to a lower pressure," says Appel, pointing at a branching series of pipes. The rapid depressurization releases about 90 percent of the slurry's free water. Dehydration via depressurization is far cheaper in terms of energy consumed than is heating and boiling off the water, particularly because no heat is wasted. "We send the flashed-off water back up there," Appel says, pointing to a pipe that leads to the beginning of the process, "to heat the incoming stream." At this stage, the minerals—in turkey waste, they come mostly from bones—settle out and are shunted to storage tanks. Rich in calcium and magnesium, the dried brown powder "is a perfect balanced fertilizer," Appel says. The remaining concentrated organic soup gushes into a second-stage reactor similar to the coke ovens used to refine oil into gasoline. "This technology is as old as the hills," says Appel, grinning broadly. The reactor heats the soup to about 900 degrees Fahrenheit to further break apart long molecular chains. Next, in vertical distillation columns, hot vapor flows up, condenses, and flows out from different levels: gases from the top of the column, light oils from the upper middle, heavier oils from the middle, water from the lower middle, and powdered carbon—used to manufacture tires, filters, and printer toners—from the bottom. "Gas is expensive to transport, so we use it on-site in the plant to heat the process," Appel says. The oil, minerals, and carbon are sold to the highest bidders. Depending on the feedstock and the cooking and coking times, the process can be tweaked to make other specialty chemicals that may be even more profitable than oil. Turkey offal, for example, can be used to produce fatty acids for soap, tires, paints, and lubricants. Polyvinyl chloride, or PVC—the stuff of house siding, wallpapers, and plastic pipes—yields hydrochloric acid, a relatively benign and industrially valuable chemical used to make cleaners and solvents. "That's what's so great about making water a friend," says Appel. "The hydrogen in water combines with the chlorine in PVC to make it safe. If you burn PVC [in a municipal-waste incinerator], you get dioxin—very toxic." Brian Appel, CEO of Changing World Technologies, strolls through a thermal depolymerization plant in Philadelphia. Experiments at the pilot facility revealed that the process is scalable—plants can sprawl over acres and handle 4,000 tons of waste a day or be "small enough to go on the back of a flatbed truck" and handle just one ton daily, says Appel.

The technicians here have spent three years feeding different kinds of waste into their machinery to formulate recipes. In a little trailer next to the plant, Appel picks up a handful of one-gallon plastic bags sent by a potential customer in Japan. The first is full of ground-up appliances, each piece no larger than a pea. "Put a computer and a refrigerator into a grinder, and that's what you get," he says, shaking the bag. "It's PVC, wood, fiberglass, metal, just a mess of different things. This process handles mixed waste beautifully." Next to the ground-up appliances is a plastic bucket of municipal sewage. Appel pops the lid and instantly regrets it. "Whew," he says. "That is nasty." Experimentation revealed that different waste streams require different cooking and coking times and yield different finished products. "It's a two-step process, and you do more in step one or step two depending on what you are processing," Terry Adams says. "With the turkey guts, you do the lion's share in the first stage. With mixed plastics, most of the breakdown happens in the second stage." The oil-to-mineral ratios vary too. Plastic bottles, for example, yield copious amounts of oil, while tires yield more minerals and other solids. So far, says Adams, "nothing hazardous comes out from any feedstock we try." "The only thing this process can't handle is nuclear waste," Appel says. "If it contains carbon, we can do it." à This Philadelphia pilot plant can handle only seven tons of waste a day, but 1,054 miles to the west, in Carthage, Missouri, about 100 yards from one of ConAgra Foods' massive Butterball Turkey plants, sits the company's first commercial-scale thermal depolymerization plant. The $20 million facility, scheduled to go online any day, is expected to digest more than 200 tons of turkey-processing waste every 24 hours.

The north side of Carthage smells like Thanksgiving all the time. At the Butterball plant, workers slaughter, pluck, parcook, and package 30,000 turkeys each workday, filling the air with the distinctive tang of boiling bird. A factory tour reveals the grisly realities of large-scale poultry processing. Inside, an endless chain of hanging carcasses clanks past knife-wielding laborers who slash away. Outside, a tanker truck idles, full to the top with fresh turkey blood. For many years, ConAgra Foods has trucked the plant's waste—feathers, organs, and other nonusable parts—to a rendering facility where it was ground and dried to make animal feed, fertilizer, and other chemical products. But bovine spongiform encephalopathy, also known as mad cow disease, can spread among cattle from recycled feed, and although no similar disease has been found in poultry, regulators are becoming skittish about feeding animals to animals. In Europe the practice is illegal for all livestock. Since 1997, the United States has prohibited the feeding of most recycled animal waste to cattle. Ultimately, the specter of European-style mad-cow regulations may kick-start the acceptance of thermal depolymerization. "In Europe, there are mountains of bones piling up," says Alf Andreassen. "When recycling waste into feed stops in this country, it will change everything." Because depolymerization takes apart materials at the molecular level, Appel says, it is "the perfect process for destroying pathogens." On a wet afternoon in Carthage, he smiles at the new plant—an artless assemblage of gray and dun-colored buildings—as if it were his favorite child. "This plant will make 10 tons of gas per day, which will go back into the system to make heat to power the system," he says. "It will make 21,000 gallons of water, which will be clean enough to discharge into a municipal sewage system. Pathological vectors will be completely gone. It will make 11 tons of minerals and 600 barrels of oil, high-quality stuff, the same specs as a number two heating oil." He shakes his head almost as if he can't believe it. "It's amazing. The Environmental Protection Agency doesn't even consider us waste handlers. We are actually manufacturers—that's what our permit says. This process changes the whole industrial equation. Waste goes from a cost to a profit." He watches as burly men in coveralls weld and grind the complex loops of piping. A group of 15 investors and corporate advisers, including Howard Buffett, son of billionaire investor Warren Buffett, stroll among the sparks and hissing torches, listening to a tour led by plant manager Don Sanders. A veteran of the refinery business, Sanders emphasizes that once the pressurized water is flashed off, "the process is similar to oil refining. The equipment, the procedures, the safety factors, the maintenance—it's all proven technology." And it will be profitable, promises Appel. "We've done so much testing in Philadelphia, we already know the costs," he says. "This is our first-out plant, and we estimate we'll make oil at $15 a barrel. In three to five years, we'll drop that to $10, the same as a medium-size oil exploration and production company. And it will get cheaper from there." "We've got a lot of confidence in this," Buffett says. "I represent ConAgra's investment. We wouldn't be doing this if we didn't anticipate success." Buffett isn't alone. Appel has lined up federal grant money to help build demonstration plants to process chicken offal and manure in Alabama and crop residuals and grease in Nevada. Also in the works are plants to process turkey waste and manure in Colorado and pork and cheese waste in Italy. He says the first generation of depolymerization centers will be up and running in 2005. By then it should be clear whether the technology is as miraculous as its backers claim.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News
KEYWORDS: brianappel; changingworld; co2; cwt; depolymerization; electrolysis; energy; energylist; enviralists; oil; technologies; thermal
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last
To: Iowa Granny
Wouldn't luck just have it? We had our septic tank pumped yesterday.
21 posted on 08/20/2003 7:46:15 AM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: linear
According to the several articles posted here in the past, this particular process differs from previous processes that were not economically feasible by using pressure or the correct pressure.
22 posted on 08/20/2003 7:50:45 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Iowa Granny
Seriously, if this works, this can be an answer to the hysteria we have here in Iowa over CAFOs.
23 posted on 08/20/2003 7:53:57 AM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: expatpat
I agree with you, it seems the cost question is determinative.
24 posted on 08/20/2003 8:06:16 AM PDT by linear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: linear
Found this on this web site ...


You see, I am convinced that most science is like computer programming which I know a little about. The question is not if something is possible, but rather how long it will take and at what expense--more specifically, is it worth it. Let's use a simple example. An electric car is possible, but each car costs SO much money that it is not economically feasible. What is obvious to me from the article is that the interviewer did not ask the hard detail questions on costs. Sure, I realize that he did have some lines about costs, but let's look at them. First quote:

"We will be able to make oil for $8 to $12 a barrel," says Paul Baskis, the inventor of the process.

Please note the future tense there. Right after the reporter got done listing the $50 million invested by individuals and government just to do the research. Further in the article you will read that the first plant cost $20 million to build. Next quote:

It will make 11 tons of minerals and 600 barrels of oil [a day]

600 barrels of oil which will sell on today's market for $30 a barrel for a total of $18,000 a day. At that rate it will take him three years just to cover the cost of building the facility. Not too bad so far. Final quote:

And it will be profitable, promises Appel. "We've done so much testing in Philadelphia, we already know the costs," he says. "This is our first-out plant, and we estimate we'll make oil at $15 a barrel. In three to five years, we'll drop that to $10, the same as a medium-size oil exploration and production company. And it will get cheaper from there."

That is where he exposes himself. You see the reporter should have asked why the costs will go down. Is that because turkey guts will get cheaper, or he will have written off the fixed costs, or is it because he is assuming that more people will adopt the technology and he will be able to spread the costs over multiple locations? I think he is only talking about the variable costs of turkey guts and keeping the lights at the factory on. He is not including the initial investments, or the reality of how much more his oil cost in terms of the opportunity cost of the natural gas he claims to pump back into the system. The real give away that they might be using rosy estimates was that the "authority" on how good an investment this is was the venture capitalist--you don't think he has an agenda, now do you? I love technology. I am very excited about things like this. I really believe that scientists will make drilling for oil a non-issue long before it runs out. But I am not so excited that I think it will happen tomorrow. I would guess that this guy has really discovered a spectacular process, but I would also guess that it is more costly than he lets on. All new technology tends to be. Will it get cheaper? You bet it will, but can the idea last long enough for the idea to get cheaper? How long will it take to get cheaper? Many great ideas fail for reasons unrelated to the greatness of the idea, let's hope that this is not true of turning turkey guts into oil.

25 posted on 08/20/2003 8:07:32 AM PDT by Fudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: *Energy_List
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list
26 posted on 08/20/2003 8:09:28 AM PDT by Libertarianize the GOP (Ideas have consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
"There is no reason why we can't turn sewage, including human excrement, into a glorious oil," says engineer Terry Adams, a project consultant.

Imagine all the General Motors vehicles which would be converted in a flash from running like shit to running on shit.

27 posted on 08/20/2003 8:10:53 AM PDT by Petronski (I'm not always cranky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
Change trash & sewage to oil for $15 a barrel

New Jersey's gonna be the next OPEC.

28 posted on 08/20/2003 8:12:44 AM PDT by Hank Rearden (Dick Gephardt. Before he dicks you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fudd; Conservativegreatgrandma; All
My question is related to economics, as well. I'm assuming they've crunched their numbers based on the assumption of 'free' chicken guts. Many of the items they propose to turn into fuel currently have some monetary value.

For instance: refrigerators, stoves, computers and other white goods hold some value to recyclers. Granted it is not a high dollar value, but value, just the same. Have their numbers been crunched based on the assumption that people will give them these fuel sources? How long will people give away something that has value?

I just had my son, the pig farmer, read this article. The area where we live is composed of family farmers and almost all of them raise livestock of some kind. Livestock sometimes die before they go to market and the farmers must pay a rendering truck to pick the 'deads' up. Son thinks our county could build one of these. But the reality is: altho a dead cow, pig, chicken, whathave you has no monetary value to a farmer, once it becomes a fuel source it will have value and farmers wouldn't be willing to give it away. See my point?

This is a facinating article. I'm glad I'll be home all day to track it.

Conservativegreatgrandma: Too bad about the septic being pumped yesterday. Perhaps by the time you need it done again, they will pay you to haul your stuff away.
29 posted on 08/20/2003 8:30:41 AM PDT by Iowa Granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
If you could get a car to run on methane, it would work. I know of vehicles that have been converted to propane.
30 posted on 08/20/2003 8:49:41 AM PDT by rewrite (Those of you who think you have all the answers tick off those of us who do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BallandPowder
There was an article here a cople of months ago....

Same Discover Mag article....

Anyone see the CWT CEO Brian Appell on Neil Cavuto's FOX News program about 3 weeks ago? Neil was impressed.

31 posted on 08/20/2003 9:21:55 AM PDT by citizen (Tom Tancredo for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
Bump for later.
32 posted on 08/20/2003 9:26:40 AM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
" But what would happen if all the trash & sewage of those ailing cities were turned to oil? "

That's a great thought, but on further examination I think you will find that the issue in these armpit countries of the world is not lack of technology or lack of natural resources. In fact the real problem is rampant corruption. Even if systems like this were installed in those countries the profits would only go to the friends and relatives of the people in power. Those countries are poor because the wealth is kept in the hands of the favored few (which Kalifornia is starting to become more and more like all the time).
33 posted on 08/20/2003 9:36:35 AM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rewrite
that's not what the article says. the article says that the biomass is converted to gas and oil. from oil the usual refining methods can be employed to produce gasoline.
34 posted on 08/20/2003 9:37:39 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
alas there's too much truth in what you say to argue with you. However, the corrupt money would be local to the economies local economies. That would be an improvement over the current system which sucks money out of the local economies.
35 posted on 08/20/2003 9:40:42 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer; *Enviralists; *Energy_List
Look at what I did over at DU:

http://tinyurl.com/kmaw

Heh heh heh!
36 posted on 08/20/2003 9:49:34 AM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fudd
ConAgra has chipped in 20 million bucks for the program. Their turkey offal plant in Missouri is now in operation. ConAgra does not have a reputation for being softheaded. Something like this is something they have to do. Agribusiness can't use stuff like turkey offal to make feed for animals anymore. Same in Europe. Its to do with the MAD COW disease.

That's why they're first in line. There are about 20 other sites slated to be started in the next year.

Europeans won't be far behind on this for the same reason. Captive markets come first.

37 posted on 08/20/2003 9:51:36 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Fudd
ConAgra has chipped in 20 million bucks for the program. Their turkey offal plant in Missouri is now in operation. ConAgra does not have a reputation for being softheaded. Something like this is something they have to do. Agribusiness can't use stuff like turkey offal to make feed for animals anymore. Same in Europe. Its to do with the MAD COW disease.

That's why they're first in line. There are about 20 other sites slated to be started in the next year.

Europeans won't be far behind on this for the same reason. Captive markets come first.

38 posted on 08/20/2003 9:51:59 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
bookmark
39 posted on 08/20/2003 9:53:07 AM PDT by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Iowa Granny
Son thinks our county could build one of these. But the reality is: altho a dead cow, pig, chicken, whathave you has no monetary value to a farmer, once it becomes a fuel source it will have value and farmers wouldn't be willing to give it away. See my point?

I do see your point but look at it from this angle also. Right now the farmer/agricultural producer has to PAY someone to get rid of his wastes. It's not even a new cost for them. They are already paying it. What if the Thermal depolymerization company charges less to haul off the waste?

The farmer saves money, the TDP company gets PAID for taking their raw materials rather than paying for those materials. Everyone wins. (except the rendering plant which loses it's raw materials)

This also drives the cost-benefit equation down on the cost side as the raw material costs are negative and the fuel costs are partially negative (gas generated by the process is used in the process).

I think that when the options for the farmer/waste producer are dispose of it yourself or pay someone to dispose of it or pay TDP less to dispose of it, they'll gladly pay TDP.

40 posted on 08/20/2003 9:56:47 AM PDT by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson