Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering

ISSN 2095-2201

ISSN 2095-221X(Online)

CN 10-1013/X

Postal Subscription Code 80-973

2018 Impact Factor: 3.883

Front Envir Sci Eng    0, Vol. Issue () : 596-611    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-012-0445-4
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Water---- and nutrient and energy---- systems in urbanizing watersheds
Rodrigo VILLARROEL WALKER1(), Michael Bruce BECK1, Jim W. HALL2
1. Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-2152, USA; 2. Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford University Centre for the Environment, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, UK
 Download: PDF(408 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Driven by considerations of sustainability, it has become increasingly difficult over the past 15–20 years — at least intellectually — to separate out the water infrastructure and water metabolism of cities from their intimately inter-related nutrient and energy metabolisms. Much of the focus of this difficulty settles on the wastewater component of the city’s water infrastructure and its associated fluxes of nutrients (N, P, C, and so on). Indeed, notwithstanding the massive volumes of these materials flowing into and out of the city, the notion of an urban nutrient infrastructure is conspicuous by its absence. Likewise, we do not tend to discuss, or conduct research into, “soilshed” agencies, or soilshed management, or Integrated Nutrient Resources Management (as opposed to its most familiar companion, Integrated Water Resources Management, or IWRM). The paper summarizes some of the benefits (and challenges) deriving from adopting this broader, multi-sectoral “systems” perspective on addressing water-nutrient-energy systems in city-watershed settings. Such a perspective resonates with the growing interest in broader policy circles in what is called the “water-food-energy security nexus”. The benefits and challenges of our Multi-sectoral Systems Analysis (MSA) are illustrated through computational results from two primary case studies: Atlanta, Georgia, USA; and London, UK. Since our work is part of the International Network on Cities as Forces for Good in the Environment (CFG; see www.cfgnet.org), in which other case studies are currently being initiated — for example, on Kathmandu, Nepal — we close by reflecting upon these issues of water-nutrient-energy systems in three urban settings with quite different styles and speeds of development.

Keywords cities      climate change      energy sector      nutrient sector      systems analysis      resource recovery      water-food-energy security     
Corresponding Author(s): WALKER Rodrigo VILLARROEL,Email:rvwalker@uga.edu   
Issue Date: 01 October 2012
 Cite this article:   
Rodrigo VILLARROEL WALKER,Michael Bruce BECK,Jim W. HALL. Water---- and nutrient and energy---- systems in urbanizing watersheds[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng, 0, (): 596-611.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/10.1007/s11783-012-0445-4
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/Y0/V/I/596
configurationdefinition
Idry sanitation system, with resource recovery at a composting facility, for example. The system has no foul sewer network, hence no wastewater treatment facilities (since no wastewater as such is generated)
IIwet sanitation system, with a combination of cess-pool and night-soil removal — with an accompanying recovery of liquid and dry forms of fertilizer — but progressively being penetrated by WCs increasingly introduced into households (hence the beginnings of a foul sewerage network)
IIIconventional, centralized sewer network and wastewater treatment plant — focused on pollutant elimination
IIIacentralized sewer network and wastewater treatment plant — re-focused on resource-energy recovery (predominantly with re-engineering interventions at the treatment plant)
Tab.1  Description of strategically different configurations of urban wastewater infrastructure
Fig.1  Simplified overall framework of the multi-sectoral city-watershed system
Fig.2  Detailed flow diagram of the waste handling sector. Dashed-border boxes denote other sectors that receive or deliver flows from or to the given sector (waste handling). Shaded boxes illustrate candidate technological innovations. Abbreviations: BF, liquid biofuel; BG, biogas; AE, air emissions; MSW, municipal solid waste; R2, recycling and reusing; TS, treated municipal sludge; SS, fresh municipal sludge; SR, sawmill residue; FE, fertilizers; LG, logging residue; LE, leaching; CCP, coal combustion products
abbreviationobjectivedescription
PRImaximizemeasure of useful products generated within the system per unit of resources consumed
RWImaximizemeasure of resources consumed per unit of waste requiring disposal
PWImaximizemeasure of the amount of products per unit of disposed waste
EEImaximizemeasure of the amount of products per unit of emission to the environment, either to the atmosphere or to water bodies
HAEunitymeasure of the disparity (ratio) between the actual amount of emissions to the atmosphere and a healthy emission level
HWEunitymeasure of the disparity (ratio) between the actual amount of emissions to water bodies and a healthy emission level
WEFunitycompares the amount of products versus the quantity that the system would generate if no flows are classified as waste and all emissions correspond to healthy emissions, i.e., waste equals food
E2Iunityencloses together the concepts of waste equalsfood and healthy emissions, describing thus the overall eco-effectiveness of the system
Tab.2  Summary of environmental sustainability indicators defined for the MSA framework
Fig.3  Energy demand (in electricity terms) for water supply and wastewater treatment, with and without the innovation of UST, where (a) represents the scenario with the introduction solely of UST, (b) is the “Business-as-Usual” scenario, with none of the candidate technologies being introduced, and (c) refers to the scenario with the three other technologies (COW, PSS, and AWW) having been introduced, but without UST. The black line is the median of the distribution; the shaded envelope represents the span of the distribution lying within its 95% confidence intervals
Fig.4  Direct carbon emissions associated with the (bio)fuels generated in the water sector and the prospective candidate technological innovations, where (a) represents several scenarios for those technological combinations that involve COW, while (b) represents those several scenarios for technological combinations that do not consider COW, including the base case (Business-as-Usual), in which none of the candidate technologies are implemented. The shaded bands correspond to 95% confidence intervals and the black line is the median of the distributions; here, as noted, the outcomes of multiple uncertain scenarios (with or without COW) are subsumed under each distribution
Fig.5  Recovery of P fertilizer, where (a) represents several scenarios for those technological combinations that involve PSS, while (b) represents several scenarios for those technological combinations that do not involve PSS, including the base case (Business–as-Usual), in which none of the candidate technologies are introduced. The shaded bands correspond to 95% confidence intervals and the black line is the median (again, as in Fig. 4, for the distributions of the outcomes of multiple uncertain scenarios)
HAEHWEWEF
pervious area infiltration×
monthly cloudiness×
nitrogen fixation rate (forest land)×
denitrification rate (forest land)×
nitrogen leaching factor×
% implementation of poultry litter pyrolysis×
surface runoff from impervious areas×
N in natural gas×
N in O horizon layer (forest land)×
N in dry deposition×
air temperature×
latitude of the region×
Tab.3  Key factors (parameters; a) to achieve a 30% improvement in three environmental indicators: HAE, health of air emissions; HWE, health of water emissions; and WEF, waste equals food [,]
1 Das K C, Garcia-Perez M, Bibens B, Melear N. Slow pyrolysis of poultry litter and pine woody biomass: impact of chars and bio-oils on microbial growth. Journal of Environmental Science and Health. Part A, Toxic/Hazardous Substances & Environmental Engineering , 2008, 43(7): 714–724
doi: 10.1080/10934520801959864 pmid:18444073
2 Beck M B, Cummings R G. Wastewater infrastructure: challenges for the sustainable city in the new millennium. Habitat International , 1996, 20(3): 405–420
doi: 10.1016/0197-3975(96)00022-7
3 WBCSD. Water, Energy and Climate Change: A Contribution From the Business Community, 2009 Available online at http://www.wbcsd.org/Pages/EDocument/EDocumentDetails.aspx?ID=40 (accessed 20July, 2012)
4 Kenway S J, Lant P A, Priestley A, Daniels P. The connection between water and energy in cities: a review. Water Science and Technology , 2011, 63(9): 1983–1990
doi: 10.2166/wst.2011.070 pmid:21902039
5 Rothausen S G S A, Conway D. Greenhouse-gas emissions from energy use in the water sector. Nature Climate Change , 2011, 1(4): 210–219
doi: 10.1038/nclimate1147
6 WEF. Water Security: The Water-Energy-Food-Climate Nexus. Washington D C: Island Press, 2011. Also available online at http://www.weforum.org/reports/water-security-water-energy-food-climate-nexus (accessed 20July, 2012)
7 Beck M B. Cities as Forces for Good in the Environment: Sustainability in the Water Sector. Athens, Georgia: Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources, University of Georgia, 2011 (ISBN: 978-1-61584-248-4). Available online at http://www.cfgnet.org (accessed 20July, 2012)
8 Semadeni-Davies A, Hernebring C, Svensson G, Gustafsson L G. The impacts of climate change and urbanisation on drainage in Helsingborg, Sweden: suburban stormwater. Journal of Hydrology , 2008, 350(1-2): 114–125
doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.11.006
9 Waters D, Watt W E, Marsalek J, Anderson B C. Adaptation of a storm drainage system to accommodate increased rainfall resulting from climate change. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management , 2003, 46(5): 755–770
doi: 10.1080/0964056032000138472
10 Ashley R, Blanksby J, Cashman A, Jack L, Wright G, Packman J, Fewtrell L, Poole T, Maksimovic C. Adaptable urban drainage: addressing change in intensity, occurrence and uncertainty of stormwater (AUDACIOUS). Built Environment , 2007, 33(1): 70–84
doi: 10.2148/benv.33.1.70
11 Barles S. Feeding the city: food consumption and flow of nitrogen, Paris, 1801-1914. Science of the Total Environment , 2007, 375(1-3): 48–58
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2006.12.003 pmid:17270249
12 Barles S. Urban metabolism and river systems: an historical perspective — Paris and the Seine, 1790-1970. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions , 2007, 4(3): 1845–1878
doi: 10.5194/hessd-4-1845-2007
13 Schmid Neset T S, Bader H P, Scheidegger R, Lohm U. The flow of phosphorus in food production and consumption — Link?ping, Sweden, 1870-2000. Science of the Total Environment , 2008, 396(2-3): 111–120
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.02.010 pmid:18377956
14 Guest J S, Skerlos S J, Barnard J L, Beck M B, Daigger G T, Hilger H, Jackson S J, Karvazy K, Kelly L, Macpherson L, Mihelcic J R, Pramanik A, Raskin L, van Loosdrecht M C M, Yeh D, Love N G. A new planning and design paradigm to achieve sustainable resource recovery from wastewater. Environmental Science & Technology , 2009, 43(16): 6126–6130
doi: 10.1021/es9010515 pmid:19746702
15 Mihelcic J R, Fry L M, Shaw R. Global potential of phosphorus recovery from human urine and feces. Chemosphere , 2011, 84(6): 832–839
doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.02.046 pmid:21429554
16 Lusk P. Methane Recovery from Animal Manures: the Current Opportunities Casebook. Golden, Colorado: National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Technical Report NREL/SR-580-25145 , 1998
17 Logan B E. Simultaneous wastewater treatment and biological electricity generation. Water Science & Technology , 2005, 52(1-2): 31–37
pmid:16180406
18 Clauwaert P, Rabaey K, Aelterman P, de Schamphelaire L, Pham T H, Boeckx P, Boon N, Verstraete W. Biological denitrification in microbial fuel cells. Environmental Science & Technology , 2007, 41(9): 3354–3360
doi: 10.1021/es062580r pmid:17539549
19 Lardon L, Hélias A, Sialve B, Steyer J P, Bernard O. Life-cycle assessment of biodiesel production from microalgae. Environmental Science & Technology , 2009, 43(17): 6475–6481
doi: 10.1021/es900705j pmid:19764204
20 Clarens A F, Resurreccion E P, White M A, Colosi L M. Environmental life cycle comparison of algae to other bioenergy feedstocks. Environmental Science & Technology , 2010, 44(5): 1813–1819
doi: 10.1021/es902838n pmid:20085253
21 Villarroel Walker R, Beck M B. How to re-balance the nitrogen metabolism of the Atlanta-Chattahoochee system? In: Carroll G D, editor. Georgia Water Resources Conference, 2011, Athens, GA, USA . Available online at http://www.gawrc.org/2011proceedings.html (accessed 20July, 2012)
22 Crutzen P J, Beck M B, Thompson M. Cities, 2007, US National Academy of Engineering, Blue Ribbon Panel on Grand Challenges for Engineering . Available online at http://www.engineeringchallenges.org. (accessed 20July, 2012)
23 Elkington J. Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Stony Creek, Connecticut: New Society Publishers, 1998
24 Beck M B, Jiang F, Shi F, Villarroel Walker R, Osidele O O, Lin Z, Demir I, Hall J W. Re-engineering cities as forces for good in the environment. Proceedings of the ICE, Engineering Sustainability , 2010, 163(1): 31–46
25 Beck M B, Thompson M, Ney S, Gyawali D, Jeffrey P. On governance for re-engineering city infrastructure. Proceedings of the ICE, Engineering Sustainability , 2011, 164(2): 129–142
26 Villarroel Walker R, Beck M B. Understanding the metabolism of urban-rural ecosystems: a multi-sectoral systems analysis. Urban Ecosystems , 2012
doi: 10.1007/s11252-012-0241-8
27 Antikainen R. Substance Flow Analysis in Finland - Four Case Studies on N and P Flows. Heilsinki, Finland: Finnish Environment Institute, Monographs of the Boreal Environment Research No. 27, 2007
28 Lang D J, Binder C R, Stauffacher M, Ziegler C, Schleiss K, Scholz R W. Material and money flows as a means for industry analysis of recycling schemes: a case study of regional bio-waste management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 2006, 49(2): 159–190
doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.03.013
29 Hornberger G M, Spear R C. Approach to the preliminary analysis of environmental systems. Journal of Environmental Management , 1981, 12(1): 7–18
30 Osidele O O, Beck M B. An inverse approach to the analysis of uncertainty in models of environmental systems. Integrated Assessment , 2003, 4(4): 265–282
doi: 10.1080/1389517049051541
31 Severn Trent Plc. Carbon Management Challenges and Renewable Energy Opportunities in the UK Water and Waste Sectors. Birmingham, UK: Severn Trent Plc., 2005. Available online at http://www.severntrent.co.uk (accessed 4August, 2011)
32 Veolia. Annual and Sustainability Report 2008. Paris, France: Veolia Environnement, 2008. Available online at http://www.veolia.com (accessed 8February, 2012)
33 GLA. Delivering London's Energy Future: the Mayor's Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy. London: Greater London Authority, 2011. Available online at http://www.london.gov.uk/who-runs-london/mayor/publication/climate-change-mitigation-energy-strategy, 2011 (accessed 28November, 2011)
34 Larsen T A, Lienert J. Novaquatis Final Report. NoMix — A New Approach to Urban Water Management . Switzerland: Eawag, 2007
35 Malmqvist P A, Aarsrud P, Pettersson F. Integrating wastewater and biowaste in the City of the Future. In: World Water Congress 2010, Montreal, Canada . London: International Water Association (IWA), 2010
36 Furness D T, Hoggett L A, Judd S J. Thermochemical treatment of sewage sludge. Water and Environment Journal , 2000, 14(1): 57–65
doi: 10.1111/j.1747-6593.2000.tb00227.x
37 Sturm B S M, Lamer S L. An energy evaluation of coupling nutrient removal from wastewater with algal biomass production. Applied Energy , 2011, 88(10): 3499–3506
doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.12.056
38 Srinath E G, Pillai S C. Phosphorus in wastewater effluents and algal growth. Journal (Water Pollution Control Federation) , 1972, 44(2): 303–308
39 Stephenson A L, Kazamia E, Dennis J S, Howe C J, Scott S A, Smith A G. Life-cycle assessment of potential algal biodiesel production in the United Kingdom: a comparison of raceways and air-lift tubular bioreactors. Energy & Fuels , 2010, 24(7): 4062–4077
doi: 10.1021/ef1003123
40 Biokube. Biokube is biological cleaning of wastewater for single houses, resorts, cities and industries.2012. Available online at http://www.biokube.com/ (accessed 8February2012)
41 Bleeker M, Gorter S, Kersten S, van der Ham L, van den Berg H, Veringa H. Hydrogen production from pyrolysis oil using the steam-iron process: a process design study. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy , 2010, 12(2): 125–135
doi: 10.1007/s10098-009-0237-0
42 Lienert J, Larsen T A. High acceptance of urine source separation in seven European countries: a review. Environmental Science & Technology , 2010, 44(2): 556–566
doi: 10.1021/es9028765 pmid:20000706
43 Beck M B,Villarroel Walker R. Global water crisis: a joined-up view from the city. S.A.P.I.EN.S [Online] , 2011, 4(1): 1–4
44 Kadam K L. Microalgae Production from Power Plant Flue Gas: Environmental Implications on a Life Cycle Basis. Golden, Colorado: National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Technical Report NREL/TP 510-29417, 2001
45 Kadam K L. Environmental implications of power generation via coal-microalgae cofiring. Energy , 2002, 27(10): 905–922
doi: 10.1016/S0360-5442(02)00025-7
46 McDonough W, Braungart M. Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things. New York: North Point Press, 2002
47 Villarroel Walker R. Sustainability Beyond Eco-efficiency: A Multi-sectoral Systems Analysis of Water, Nutrients, and Energy. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree . Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia, 2010
48 Hu Z. Modeling Urban Growth in the Atlanta, Georgia Metropolitan Area Using Remote Sensing and GIS. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree . Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia, 2004
49 Niemczynowicz J. New aspects of sewerage and water technology. Ambio , 1993, 22(7): 449–455
50 Elser J, Bennett E. Phosphorus cycle: a broken biogeochemical cycle. Nature , 2011, 478(7367): 29–31
doi: 10.1038/478029a pmid:21979027
51 Villarroel Walker R, Beck M B. Innovation, multi-utility service businesses and sustainable cities: where might be the next breakthrough? In: Singapore International Water Week 2012 , Singapore: IWA Publishing, 2012
52 Collingridge D. The Social Control of Technology. Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1981
53 Thompson M. Unsiteability: what should it tell us? Risk , 1996, 7(2): 169–179
54 Gyawali D. Water, sanitation and human settlements: crisis, opportunity or management? Water Nepal , 2004, 11(2): 7–20
doi: 10.3126/wn.v11i2.135
55 Thompson M. Material Flows and Moral Positions, 2011, CFG Network: CFG Insight. Available online at http://www.cfgnet.org(accessed 20July, 2012)
56 van Asselt M, Rotmans J. Uncertainty in perspective. Global Environmental Change , 1996, 6(2): 121–157
doi: 10.1016/0959-3780(96)00015-5
57 Dixit A. Basic Water Science. Kathmandu, Nepal: Nepal Water Conservation Foundation, 2002
58 NWCF. The Bagmati: Issues, Challenges and Prospects. Kathmandu, Nepal: Nepal Water Conservation Foundation (NWCF), Technical Report prepared for King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation, 2009
59 Liang S, Zhang T. Urban metabolism in China achieving dematerialization and decarbonization in Suzhou. Journal of Industrial Ecology , 2011, 15(3): 420–434
doi: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00343.x
60 C?té R, Grant J, Weller A, Zhu Y, Toews C. Industrial ecology and the sustainability of Canadian cities. Nova Scotia, Canada: Eco-Efficiency Centre Dalhousie University Halifax, Report prepared for The Conference Board of Canada, 2006
61 Dagerskog L, Coulibaly C, Ouandaoga I. The emerging market of treated human excreta in Ouagadougou. Urban Agriculture Magazine , 2010, 23: 45–48
62 TanikawaH, SakamotoT, HashimotoS, MoriguchiY. Visualization of regional material flow using over-flow potential maps. In: 6th International Conference on EcoBalance 2004, Tsukuba, Japan . Tsukuba: The Society of Non-Traditional Technology, 2004, 567–570
63 Dong X, Zeng S, Chen J. A spatial multi-objective optimization model for sustainable urban wastewater system layout planning. Water Science & Technology , 2012, 66(2): 267–274
64 Lefèvre B.Urban transport energy consumption: determinants and strategies for its reduction. An analysis of the literature . S.A.P.I.EN.S [Online], 2009, 2(3): 35–51
65 Kaye J P, Groffman P M, Grimm N B, Baker L A, Pouyat R V. A distinct urban biogeochemistry? Trends in Ecology & Evolution , 2006, 21(4): 192–199
doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2005.12.006 pmid:16701085
[1] Min Yang, Xianghui Li, Weixiang Chao, Xiang Gao, Huan Wang, Lu Lu. Renewable biosynthesis of isoprene from wastewater through a synthetic biology approach: the role of individual organic compounds[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2024, 18(3): 28-.
[2] Kui Zou, Hongyuan Liu, Bo Feng, Taiping Qing, Peng Zhang. Recovery of cyanophycin granule polypeptide from activated sludge: carbon source dependence and aggregation-induced luminescence characteristics[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2024, 18(2): 16-.
[3] Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Panagiotis Tsigaris. The relevance of James Lovelock’s research and philosophy to environmental science and academia[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2023, 17(3): 39-.
[4] Yisheng Shao, Yijian Xu. Challenges and countermeasures of urban water systems against climate change: a perspective from China[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2023, 17(12): 156-.
[5] Chaoxue Song, Hong S. He, Kai Liu, Haibo Du, Justin Krohn. Impact of historical pattern of human activities and natural environment on wetland in Heilongjiang River Basin[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2023, 17(12): 151-.
[6] Wenjing Lu, Weizhong Huo, Huwanbieke Gulina, Chao Pan. Development of machine learning multi-city model for municipal solid waste generation prediction[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2022, 16(9): 119-.
[7] Hanli Wan, Jianmin Bian, Han Zhang, Yihan Li. Assessment of future climate change impacts on water-heat-salt migration in unsaturated frozen soil using CoupModel[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2021, 15(1): 10-.
[8] Akshay Jain, Zhen He. “NEW” resource recovery from wastewater using bioelectrochemical systems: Moving forward with functions[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2018, 12(4): 1-.
[9] Hyunhee Kim, Yong-Chul Jang, Yeonjung Hwang, Youngjae Ko, Hyunmyeong Yun. End-of-life batteries management and material flow analysis in South Korea[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2018, 12(3): 3-.
[10] Devin L. Maurer, Jacek A. Koziel, Kelsey Bruning. Field scale measurement of greenhouse gas emissions from land applied swine manure[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2017, 11(3): 1-.
[11] Markku Kulmala,Tuukka Petäjä,Veli-Matti Kerminen,Joni Kujansuu,Taina Ruuskanen,Aijun Ding,Wei Nie,Min Hu,Zhibin Wang,Zhijun Wu,Lin Wang,Douglas R. Worsnop. On secondary new particle formation in China[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2016, 10(5): 8-.
[12] Michael Patrick WALSH. PM2.5: global progress in controlling the motor vehicle contribution[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2014, 8(1): 1-17.
[13] Michael B. MCELROY. Challenge of global climate change: Prospects for a new energy paradigm[J]. Front.Environ.Sci.Eng., 2010, 4(1): 2-11.
[14] SUN Yongliang, LI Xiaoyan, LIU Lianyou, XU Heye, ZHANG Dengshan. Climate change and sandy land development in Qinghai Lake Watershed, China[J]. Front.Environ.Sci.Eng., 2008, 2(3): 340-348.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed