Electric cars - UK.

Alternative energy sources
Forum rules
The usual. As I have two large solar PV systems here, and my lab assistant just put one in, and others are interested in things like this, here's where that stuff goes. This is mostly for things that work now, not "gee someday a fusor will do this" -- we know that, but it's not someday yet.
The hope is to save anyone embarking on this sort of thing a lot of wasted time and money, as at least I have been off the grid since 1980 and have had a lot of practice (and made mistakes you won't have to).

Re: Electric cars - UK.

Postby Doug Coulter » Mon Dec 17, 2012 7:06 pm

The uh-oh of a charge point already having an EV on it - or worse, an ICE car that didn't read the sign, is already reported all the time at gm-volt.com. You're right about that one. With the Volt, the issue is the 120v charger they give you isn't worth plugging in during a visit to a neighbor, it just doesn't charge fast enough, you need a special high current 240v line for a faster charge (4.5 hours dead to full).

Ford is making a number of hybrids and plug ins here. They'll get there, they are just learning, but once they get going - look out.
They don't have GM's hypercool transmission (patents) though. GM's is continuously variable with no slipping clutches and very few parts, it's super neat design.

The big urban sprawl might work in the favor of a car that uses essentially no energy to wait in traffic. It does here with the Volt. I have two ways to get to Blacksburg (two towns over). One way is five miles shorter, but includes about 5 miles of highway at 65-70 mph (if you don't want to be run over), while the longer way is stop-go traffic, 45 mph max, 35 or so more normal. I can always make the round trip going the slower, longer way. Never have made it using the highway, either way. That wind resistance going up faster than the 3rd power of speed is killer (the Reynolds number makes it a little faster than just cubic).

You can of course, lease any car. It's a bit weird to just lease part of it...Has Renault really gone up in quality since they made the worse cars, even the worst French ones?
(which is saying something...having owned a Fiat, a Citroen, and an MG at one time or another) If they think that's a cool deal (for them) it might mean that leased battery outlives the part they insist on selling you outright!

By the way, the inflation tax (salaries constant or going down while everything you need goes up - but little to no inflation is reported because some things you don't need aren't going up, but down) - is not just in the UK, it's here too, bigtime. Our core inflation reporting completely leaves out food and energy....a joke, that's all I buy. But it includes housing, which I own outright, and it going down is used to "cancel" the super fast increase in health care costs...what a cheat (so if I have to sell my house to afford the hospital, I'm double-screwed). Or, better yet - since a new smartphone is twice as fast as the last model, but at the same price, our government, using "hedonics", says phones haven't gone up in price, but down! Ditto meat, since I've just switched, according to them, to cheaper chicken and never eat a steak anymore. This isn't the right thread for this - I rant on and on about it on another here...but that doesn't make it not-real. We are being screwed to pay for the mistakes of the large financial entities.

With what they've handed out to those guys, over and especially under the table, they could write a 100k check to every living person. That would be some stimulus! But that's not what they care about, it's taking care of the owners of the political system, which, in case you haven't noticed, isn't us.
Can you go to the fed, borrow money at 0.25% interest and use it to buy bonds that pay 3.5% with a government guarantee (no other collateral required either)? That's what I call under the table, quite profitable for the big banks as they can do it in size. It also enables overspending by governments to buy votes, since all that demand keeps the interest rate on bonds down to a mere 3.something percent here (unlike, say, Italy or Spain). What a scam! Makes me want to move to Iceland, where they at least had the guts to tell the bankers to do things where the sun don't shine.
Posting as just me, not as the forum owner. Everything I say is "in my opinion" and YMMV -- which should go for everyone without saying.
User avatar
Doug Coulter
 
Posts: 2944
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 8:05 pm
Location: Floyd county, VA, USA

Re: Electric cars - UK.

Postby chrismb » Mon Dec 17, 2012 8:20 pm

Doug Coulter wrote:Has Renault really gone up in quality since they made the worse cars, even the worst French ones?
(which is saying something...having owned a Fiat, a Citroen, and an MG at one time or another)
I don't think Renaults were ever bad cars - they were, simply, designed to fail at 80k (takes good engineering to make that happen!!!), and be financially non-viable after that. They've simply pushed that number up a bit to around 120k, 'cos folks do more miles in Europe now and people would begin to notice!! :)

That, and also that design them to have very costly minor failures too, in which the parts that actually fail cost next to nothing, but the labour charges are a couple of days worth! That keeps their mechanics busy and in gainful employment!

I think they have tried very hard in the last decade to produce some real quality cars. Part of the problem is that they sell so many cars there will be equally lots of bad stories that go along. It is human nature (especially for those folks who buy at the 'cheaper' end of the market) that if the car works that's what they demand, and if they fail then they squeal about it. Fair enough, I suppose, but it means that the volume sellers end up with disproportionate after-sales grief.

There is another effect I noticed too with cheaper cars, which is fairly obvious when you think about it - if it adds little to the residual value of a car just because it is serviced (that is to say, even if it was fully serviced it'd still be worth next to nothing!) then a succession of owners may do little to follow the correct service schedule.

If you own a 10 year old Renault that is worth $100 then are you really going to pay $500 on a service? If you own a 10 year old Merc that is worth $10,000 then are you really going to skimp on a $500 service? They are both machines, there is nothing magical about either, just that one gets all the servicing it needs and the other doesn't. Hence once a brand gets a reputation for low value then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.

The good thing about EVs is that there is nothing to service! It will be a real leveller for reliability between the brands, I reckon.

I say all this in full knowledge of Renault's foibles - the other two cars of the household are both Renaults! One we have had for 5 years. Fully serviced and regularly used with modest private mileage (it is important to keep using them too - they don't last long if you park them up) I found it in good condition at a good price at 6 years old and it has not had anything at all go wrong with it, excepting for a bonnet release cable that failed (which the service centre should have picked up as it had had a service just before the incident). Considering it spends much of its life on short journeys chugging around town, it's done well. The other bought this year has also been good excepting a heater matrix that stared leaking. I've never even heard of such a failure before, let alone have one! Cost of parts was trivial, but the full removal of the dashboard was a 13 hr job. At main dealer rates it was quoted at £1,800 (yup, almost $3,000 just for a small leak!). Fortunately for me a warranty company had persuaded me to take a policy with them after I bought the car, and (unfortunately for them) this was a covered item!! So that was a really big job, and did waste my time sorting it. But what counts now is whether it works reliably from here on, of course.

There is some truth in what you say, of course - I'm just waiting for the next thing to go wrong with them all! :| But isn't that always the case with older cars? In the long run, older cars don't always cost less than newer cars to own and run. Hence I am reconsidering my current 'fleet' given the financially incentivized push on EVs at the moment. This is the very motivation I feel at the moment, in an attempt to bring some 'predictability' to my life.

Y'know, it is simply ridiculous that a chartered professional engineer with 20 years experience should put up with clunky old cars. 10 years ago I had a succession of 3 new cars, one after the other (in fact, two I had at the same time!). Now, I am reduced to running cars over 10 years old. In reality, I don't think it is much cheaper to do that than to get something warrantied and new, but the cars we have now have been 'loyal beasts' to date and reality is that with the relatively diminishing income levels then until these actually go wrong and become unserviceable, I don't really have much of a case to buy another. However, when one does decide to hand in its retirement ticket, then I think I'm fairly decided that I'll go for something new (or just a few months old if I can, so the cost hit is softened) and that an EV may be the right tool to perform the desired role.
chrismb
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 7:32 pm

Re: Electric cars - UK.

Postby chrismb » Wed Dec 19, 2012 12:45 pm

Doug Coulter wrote:I have two ways to get to Blacksburg (two towns over). One way is five miles shorter, but includes about 5 miles of highway at 65-70 mph (if you don't want to be run over), while the longer way is stop-go traffic, 45 mph max, 35 or so more normal.
So, what's the slowest you'd drive on the highway?

Here the trucks are speed limited to 90kph (56mph). When I am in hypermiling mood I will adopt 52mph. This is because, as you say, slower can cause problems to other traffic if you overdo it. Whereas adopting 55ish here ends up 'mixing it' with the trucks because they don't have a sufficiently distinct differential speed to overtake you quickly. So, 52 allows them to catch you up at a modest rate without particularly slowing them down because they have a few moments to plan and execute the overtake in one go, and not get caught up behind you.

I used to get mid 80's mpg (best was 89.1mpg, cold start at work, to key-off in front of my house) from my Skoda Octavia I had 10 years back, by cruising at 52. (It was a 3,000 lb 1.9 litre 110bhp diesel with variable turbo geometry.)
chrismb
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 7:32 pm

Re: Electric cars - UK.

Postby chrismb » Sat Dec 22, 2012 6:53 am

Doug Coulter wrote:That wind resistance going up faster than the 3rd power of speed is killer (the Reynolds number makes it a little faster than just cubic).

Just to be precise: The actual wind resistance is a square term (F=½ρ.A.Cd.v2). However, as you go faster so you are travelling further in a given Δt so the power then has another v term in it. So the wind resistance is a square (ish) term whilst it is the power required is cubic.

Fuel burnt over a given distance relates to the wind resistance (~kv^2) because it relates to work done=F.d, whereas fuel burnt in a given time relates to the power (~kv^3).
chrismb
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 7:32 pm

Re: Electric cars - UK.

Postby Doug Coulter » Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:10 pm

Dunno if it's reynolds (turbulence) or what...but that's one sharp rise I notice above around 40 ish (mph). You almost can't tell the difference between 35 and 45, but the diff between 45 and 55 is like double the energy/mile. And 65-70 mph, you might just as well short the battery out.

I've been measuring this as total range vs speed - not vs time as such, and it goes down very very very fast above 45 mph - regardless of the math - maybe there's a missing term for turbulence there. I can go 40 miles (typical, I've hit 50 hypermiling on a warm day, which helps the battery capacity) if I stay at 40ish and below. At 65, it's more like 20 miles, tops. So I'm putting the "knee" of the curve around 40 mph insofar as actual range per kwh - as experienced in real life. I'm sure the higher drain rate also doesn't help, even with the high tech Li ions, there's gotta be some series R (and there's loss=I^2*R going on all over the system).

Not that I've noticed fast starts hurt me much. A lot of hypermilers (and this probably varies with drivetrain tech) say never do that. I don't notice a big hurt from getting to speed fast. What I DO notice is that if I get going too fast and have to use the brakes, well, that's energy changed into heat - or even without brakes, to the wind as you go back down to the real speed you wanted. Even regeneration loses some. Anything that makes the tires work hard wastes energy as well - hard cornering, for example. But just getting to speed quickly, in this Volt and also in many other cars I've owned, doesn't seem to hurt much - most IC engines actually are more efficient at WOT on the torque peak. (Of course, with things like that Camaro, they deliberately go fuel-rich at high throttle for more power, and that negates this).

I really notice I get better range on cruise control on the highway - because even a few minutes going "too fast" hurts more than anything, and 1-2 mph is noticeable on how it affects range at highway speeds here. Helps far more on the highway than pooting around my backroads.
Posting as just me, not as the forum owner. Everything I say is "in my opinion" and YMMV -- which should go for everyone without saying.
User avatar
Doug Coulter
 
Posts: 2944
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 8:05 pm
Location: Floyd county, VA, USA

Re: Electric cars - UK.

Postby chrismb » Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:01 am

I was going to ask you about your thoughts on the 'optimum acceleration' thing, Doug. I'd be interested to get into the detail of that.

The efficiencies/inefficiencies for ICE's and motors marks out the differences in how best to drive them. The aerodynamic term is, almost obviously, a v^2 term because it is the kinetic energy of the air you're pushing out of the way. However, for ICE, for example, the engine runs more efficiently under load and higher throttle (due to lower 'zero-pumping' losses) than at lower load (for a given RPM) so as you go faster the v^2 term is less pronounced for an ICE.

Whereas for a permanent magnet motor, such as the Volt has, as you go faster then you get to a point where you have to implement field weakening. This is because (in round general terms) the back EMF begins to match the drive voltage. So it runs up to a given Volts/Hz up to its design maximum, thereafter it runs in constant Volts mode at faster motor speeds. I don't know that much about motors but I'm aware that this can be 'designed' for to some extent. However, from my understanding there is a region just before the max Volts/Hz (which defines the point of field, aka flux, weakening) and beyond which risks high losses and demagnetisation.

I suspect that is, in part, why the Volt has two motors, to summate their speeds and avoid the flux weakening regime where it is, and as far as, possible to do it.

So, on the broadest brush analysis, I would have guessed that EV's consumed J/mile with permanent magnet motors exceed the v^2 term, as you have noted, and that ICE's drop under the v^2 term.

For ICE's (and the diesels I drive) it certainly seems to be an efficiency improvement to use the highest gear possible and a 'significant' throttle position. So I am usually operating only in the 900 to 1200rpm range in town (up to 1500 rpm if there is insufficient torque at 1200 for an incline or desired accel) with a half to 3/4 pedal. Lighter pedal positions and higher engine speeds both deliver worse economy, but also not too much pedal at low rpm else the system may try to 'overfuel' and runs rich. Diesels run, in effect, continuously 'open throttle' so the engine power is defined simply by the amount of fuel being fed into it, so the amount of fuel going in simply goes up as the power demand is increased and it will happily oblige and feed in an excess of fuel, if you are too heavy footed, because that is what you're asking for!

For EV's, I can't think of any particular reason why accelerating hard from stand still (up to flux weakening) should reduce your miles/kWh other that the longer time spent at the faster speeds. Obviously, if you are accelerating unnecessarily to the point that you have to brake again for the next junction, then as sensible folks we know that's not right. Repetitive heavy acels will, again obviously, heat up the batteries and therefore there is an inefficiency associated with that.

But otherwise, an occasional goodly stomp on the loud pedal from standstill should get you ahead of the ICE traffic without impacting overall energy use. Do you think this is right?

Incidentally, the Nissan/Renault EV offerings apparently don't use permanent magnet motors but use a wound rotor. I have tried to establish if they do this inductively or with commutators but can't find that information. I suppose, in theory, this could make them more efficient (or at lease, easier to design to be efficient) than a machine at higher speeds where all else is equal but less efficient at the lower speeds (but it is not so important to be efficient when burning less juice anyway).
chrismb
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 7:32 pm

Re: Electric cars - UK.

Postby Doug Coulter » Tue Dec 25, 2012 12:39 am

Yes, the two-motor system is used to keep motor speeds and torques in a good range. There are two input shafts to the tranny - it's just a planetary with more than one thing hooked to more than one part of it, and some clutches - pretty amazing mech engineering, I'll have to find that "how it works" video of it. The electric motor-generators are inside the tranny and cooled by its oil, as are the clutches. I believe (have to find that vid and check again) that one of the clutches merely can "clamp one thing" to "ground" and stop it spinning in there, which kind of changes the gear ratios of the other 3 shafts (two input, one output).

The Volt uses current limiting to avoid demagnetization of the PMs, which is obvious from this histogram:
Opel_Ampera_Power-Speed-Histogram.jpg
Power histogram

Either motor can turn in either direction in most modes (or be clamped to stop). When the ICE is running, it's a little more restricted - it can't go backwards, and is clutched into the same shaft as one of the electrics. All the clutches in this thing (3 IIRC) are only "dropped" when there's a perfect rev match already made, you never feel one, ever. The only time you feel something like a gear change is when we go from ICE driving one motor as a generator (with the other motor driving the car) to the case where all 3 are clutched to the tranny. For that to happen, revs have to be matched first, so you lose power for an instant, like in most shifts, then wham - you suddenly have a ton of horsepower.
This only happens if the ICE was already running, you're going within a range of speed, and you ask for more than the car could give without direct clutching of the ICE in there, with both electrics also going maxed out (one in parallel with the ICE).

I find it easy to squirt out ahead of traffic, and do it when it makes sense, but not at full throttle (unless I'm showing off), and not to more than the speed I want to get to for cruising. This is the most agile-in-traffic car I've ever even imagined, it's almost a shame I hardly ever encounter any. Heck, it can do front-wheel burnouts if you turn the anti-fun computer off.

Basically, anytime you use the brakes, wind or even regen to slow down, the right thing to have done was not to have gotten going too fast in the first place - because you paid for that in energy, use it or not. In tests, we've found that driving small rolling hills (kind of the norm here) at speeds of 35-45 is best done without regen or cruise control, letting the car speed up going down one to help coast most of the way up the next. At higher speeds, you're better off with max regen (the wind would take it anyway, might as well get some back) and CC to keep the peak speed at your setting. And sadly, one avoids hard cornering if one wants max range - bringing the tires to near-slippage is horribly wasteful of energy (and tire life).

To say it nicely, I'm not so sure it's only a square function, and my own tests say there's more to it than that - and of course, that's why millions are spent on wind tunnels.

The truth is, if I go say 35 all the way to the local store (the trip I make most often) it uses less than half a charge in 27.5 miles. If I go 45, it uses more than half. 50, and I'm lucky to make it home on one charge. That's even with slowing down for the sharper corners to avoid pushing the tire limits.

The battery actually likes to be warm for this chemistry, within limits. You get more capacity when it is. You get a lot less when it's cold - both because of chemistry, and because some of the battery is used to warm up the battery...Also, if it's cold, you might not be happy with just the heated seats (they'll put blisters on you at max with almost no power drain) and need to run the "real" heater - which can draw ~~ 5.5kw by itself, a real range-killer. I've only been doing tests when I don't have that variable involved. One nice thing about this machine (and I'd guess most all hybrids) is - almost zero power drain while sitting stopped. Great car in a traffic jam I suppose, but I avoid those like the plague - and am lucky to be able to do so.
Posting as just me, not as the forum owner. Everything I say is "in my opinion" and YMMV -- which should go for everyone without saying.
User avatar
Doug Coulter
 
Posts: 2944
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 8:05 pm
Location: Floyd county, VA, USA

Re: Electric cars - UK.

Postby chrismb » Mon Jul 15, 2013 3:32 pm

I've put a holding deposit down on an 18 month old Renault Fluence today - a pure EV with ~100 mile range.

Deal still to be haggled out and finalised, but more later ..... trust me, it'll be a good deal!

Bottom line is these EV's look like white elephants and no-one's buying ... discounts are rolling in and one must strike while the opportunity arises, as there aren't many of these things around! Fortunately, my commuting pattern is perfectly suited to using this car. I'm probably one of the sub-1% of UK people who'll actually be able to make reasonable use of this type of car!
chrismb
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 7:32 pm

Re: Electric cars - UK.

Postby Doug Coulter » Tue Jul 16, 2013 2:42 pm

Awesome - I hope. Seems like the quick-change battery idea sort of failed in Isreal, though being a pretty good place to try such a thing.

I suppose the jury is out on whether GM's rather extreme battery control measures are really required - I'd bet this car doesn't have most of them, certainly not active by-cell cooling - I'd guess things like that would make an automated swap too difficult.

GM uses 3 series strings of 96 cells apiece (then in parallel), and does a lot of computer control stuff to make sure they stay equalized, shunting current around during the charge process.
They only let me use the middle 10kwh out of the 16 kwh nominal.
They heat the battery in winter, cool it in summer. It's not really a temperature regulation scheme, but one that only activates outside some pretty wide limits.

Nissan Leaf doesn't do any of this - and a host of their batteries failed young - in the desert areas of the US. I don't suspect you'll run into that one in UK.

You could of course, self-enforce using only part of the battery capacity if you thought that one was important. I could find neither the precise chemistry Renault uses, nor any real details of their control system, so I can't make even a guess here - all the variations have significantly different issues. Evidently overcharging and undercharging is what causes most Li batteries of whatever chemistry and electrodes to fail young. In either case, all the Li is at one electrode or another, swelling it and eventually causing it to crack etc.

I do notice a large difference in battery performance vs temperature here. It's nothing much to see 50-60 miles range in summer here (80F or thereabouts), yet only 35 or so in winter (30's F) - even without running the power-hog heater. The GM active temp control system only activates below 20F and above 100F, so it rarely has to work here.
I believe (but could be wrong) that the battery coolant loop (separate from either the engine one or the A/C) runs through one of the many radiators all the time, but only active heating/cooling happens if outdoor temps are "stupid".

What's in the GM system is so complex as to raise some doubts whether the added complexity (and cost!) really makes the net package more reliable - there are 96 separate flow controllers for coolant fin supply. There are about that many uP's in there doing charge control/equalization, with relays to shunt current around (and resistors). Of course, there's a lot of monitoring going on in there. I have to say the GM "guess o meter" for remaining range is in fact quite accurate, mostly - the one thing it doesn't handle well is a trip where you go uphill for the first part and downhill on the return, or vice versa, as it adapts to how you're driving, and you obviously have more range going downhill than up. Other than that, it appears to be dead-on.

I'd love to hear how this thing drives. I'm loving my heavier/more-powerful Volt (111kw instead of 85 for example). I like the low CG of the car, and it's quiet and frame stiffness - it really feels like a solid machine (compared to say, a Prius).
Posting as just me, not as the forum owner. Everything I say is "in my opinion" and YMMV -- which should go for everyone without saying.
User avatar
Doug Coulter
 
Posts: 2944
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 8:05 pm
Location: Floyd county, VA, USA

Re: Electric cars - UK.

Postby chrismb » Tue Jul 16, 2013 3:35 pm

Ha. Doug, sometimes I disagree with you a little. But sometimes, you've read my mind, word for word!

I've gone over exactly the same sequence of thoughts on all of this.

For reference, I came across a new article the other day dated from 2010 in which Mr Musk is asked to comment on why he thinks all the cost he's put into his battery tech is worth it. He derides the Nissan technology (read across to Renault) that the technology is 'primitive' and forecasts the dismal performance of Nissan batteries in the heat. He got that one spot on. He had kinder words for GM, for their temp control systems.

(just do a search for 'musk primitive nissan battery cooling')

Yeah, the Fluence's removable battery pack is air cooled, so I'm lead to believe from what I can find. I can't see how else it'd be removable, quickly.

Lithium phosphate type is suspected (not confirmed).

I'm going to ask them to do a battery health check before I collect, just to confirm it hasn't been abused. It's a lease battery, but all the same it is the one that I'm going to have to use so I want it pukka. I also suspect that in a few years they'll want shot of the stuff and maybe I can haggle buying it outright.

If other users abuse their batteries and they develop a habit of dying prematurely, maybe they'll be all too keen to flog me the one in my car. In which case, it is important for me to make sure mine isn't one of 'the abused'!

So, yes, battery health is absolutely 'A No.1' priority, and I will stick religiously to the mid-range of usage whenever possible because that's definitely the sweet spot for reliable Li ion usage. I should be able to stick with a 25% - 75% usage profile on my daily commute.

And, yeah, in UK I am trusting that our weather makes things 'OK' for the battery. It's hitting 30C at the moment, but it's not likely to get higher and that should be fine for Li - though I do worry a little about how effective the air cooling is (are there filters that can get bunged up? Where are they? Etc, etc...)

I will think carefully about winter time use. This will need extra charge to run the heaters. I will have to do a precharge the previous day, say just up to 50% for overnight, then a pre-drive charge to 80% that will also allow the car to heat up on direct power, and also heat the batteries up gently from charging to ready them for driving.

I'm getting a bit of an impression that Renault can afford to let these cars go, and probably needs to, because the ultimate beta test is to get them into the hands of real customers. They're just not selling, so how else but to virtually give them away?

One thing I already know for sure - driving pure EV's will be all about 'planning'! When to charge, how much, where to go, etc. etc. But I do that already to get my Vectra to 'hypermiling' levels, so it's no big hit for me. I suspect the effort would simply be beyond 99% of most other people's attention/interest-level! I predict EVs in the UK will be an expensive flop for the Government (so much funding investment) and of course the committed car companies (Nissan Renault are now at ~$5bn, and no-one's even bothering to buy the things yet!).

If I close the deal tomorrow ('many a slip twixt cup and lip'!) I'll let you know and I might guess I'll probably be about the 10th person or so in the UK to buy one of these things. Not sure on how many have actually sold to 'real' end-consumer customers yet, but the only figure I found on country-wide sales of the Fluence was in Ireland .. I am lead to believe in Ireland, where they were released a year earlier, that they have sold ... 3 !

Oh. Most important thing to ask ... I have a choice of two cars, one silver, one light metallic blue. Wife wants blue, I'm more for silver. Colour may well turn out to be the most important thing about EV's?!!
chrismb
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 7:32 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Alt energy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest