18 ms·
Finland's plan to bury spent nuclear fuel for 100k years
- dispenser43 3y ago[dead]
- dispenser43 3y ago[dead]
- lilytubby 3y ago[dead]
- lilytubby 3y ago[dead]
- leechcrowded 3y ago[dead]
- leechcrowded 3y ago[dead]
- cavernousstart 3y ago[dead]
- cavernousstart 3y ago[dead]
- tailluxurious 3y ago[dead]
- tailluxurious 3y ago[dead]
- reserved45 3y ago[dead]
- reserved45 3y ago[dead]
- tactless23 3y ago[dead]
- tactless23 3y ago[dead]
- foottermite 3y ago[dead]
- foottermite 3y ago[dead]
- siemensutility 3y ago[dead]
- siemensutility 3y ago[dead]
- poopcyan 3y ago[dead]
- poopcyan 3y ago[dead]
- screeching6 3y ago[dead]
- screeching6 3y ago[dead]
- supercargo5 3y ago[dead]
- supercargo5 3y ago[dead]
- accidental4 3y ago[dead]
- accidental4 3y ago[dead]
- skulltoy 3y ago[dead]
- skulltoy 3y ago[dead]
- canarycoffle 3y ago[dead]
- canarycoffle 3y ago[dead]
- boringspotted 3y ago[dead]
- boringspotted 3y ago[dead]
- alludewillow 3y ago[dead]
- alludewillow 3y ago[dead]
- snoreburnet 3y ago[dead]
- snoreburnet 3y ago[dead]
- multiply3 3y ago[dead]
- multiply3 3y ago[dead]
- pierat 3y agoWhat I don't get is the following: If your nuclear waste is that "hot" (highly radioactive), then you're not draining as much energy out of the material. Ideally, the closer to lead you are, the more energy is drained out. And that's what I'd hope to see from the mining required for uranium. Instead, we seem to run it once and then go "whoop have to stop".
- acidburnNSA 3y agoNot sure I'm following. Fission reactors split uranium into smaller atoms like barium and krypton. The remaining energy that comes out as afterglow heat in the repository is a small fraction of what already came out during fission. less than 1% remains an hour after fissioning.
- nabla9 3y agoYou have the numbers reversed. In spent nuclear fuel 96% of the mass is the remaining uranium is still usable. Spend nuclear fuel (=LEU) used in these reactors have almost all potential energy left. You can use them if you close the nuclear fuel cycle with fast neutron reactors. The downside of it is that they FNR's are also good for making fuel for nuclear weapons.
- acidburnNSA 3y agoI don't have the numbers reversed. I'm talking about when a single atom actually undergoes fission, it releases 93% of its energy promptly as fission product kinetic energy, gamma rays, and neutron kinetic energy. An hour later, another 6% of the energy goes out as delayed betas and gammas. After that, only 1% remains to emerge as heat in the repository. What you're referring to is the fact that some reactors (aka breeder reactors, fast or thermal) can fission a much higher percentage of the total atoms loaded into the reactor, including most of the majority isotope (U-238) in addition to the minority (U-235). I wrote a bit about breeding and recycling here: https://whatisnuclear.com/recycling.html https://whatisnuclear.com/recycling.html
- 3y ago
- acidburnNSA 3y agoI'm excited that Onkalo will be coming onine soon, so we don't have to hear the myth that there's no solution for spent nuclear fuel anymore. The solution that enjoys a solid scientific consensus is the deep geologic repository. Another thing that is weird to me is that everyone says nuclear waste is hazardous for a uniquely long time, but it become less hazardous over time. Many non-radioactive materials, like arsenic and mercury, are toxic forever. In the US we have WIPP operating, but it stores weapons-related radioactive material rather than commercial spent fuel, so I guess it doesn't count. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_Isolation_Pilot_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_Isolation_Pilot_Plant
- PinguTS 3y agoBurying things in the ground is not a solution. It's more an Ostrich policy.
- linksnapzz 3y agoBurying things securely until a better solution can be found is a better than letting them sit onsite in storage pools...
- phkahler 3y agoBut may not be better than shutting it all down.
- linksnapzz 3y agoSorry, I like reliable electricity, I don't live near a hydro plant, and I'd prefer not to burn coal. Nuclear does what I want, and if the desire for a perfect solution for waste handling gets in the way of a good method for keeping the lights on while we work towards improving the isolation and transmutation of waste-that desire needs to be set aside.
- PinguTS 3y agoI agree to in way that this is currently the only viable way to handle the situation. But it is not a solution.
- jwestbury 3y agoHow interesting, I was just reading about this in the context of nuclear semiotics and how to pass down warnings about the danger of nuclear waste. (This is a really interesting topic without much in the way of clear answers, depending on what you're optimising for. Highly recommend reading the Wikipedia page[0] at a minimum.) There's apparently a documentary on this project, "Into Eternity," released in 2010, which has been on my list since earlier this morning (i.e., since I read about its existence). 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_nuclear_waste_warning_messages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_nuclear_waste_warnin...
- nabla9 3y agoThe mechanical container solution is top notch, but 99% of the safety is just geological stability and selecting right place. Over 2 billion year old granite with very few cracks far from any fault lines. The worst possible scenario they calculated: 1) the nuclear canister would corrode in a thousand years instead of the calculated hundred thousand years, 2) and at the same time installed clay buffer surrounding canisters would inexplicably disappear. 3) In addition, the groundwater would magically flow upwards and 4) a city would be built on the site. A person who would live on the most polluted square meter from cradle to grave and would only eat food grown there and drink the most polluted water Result: people would only receive three times the radiation dose compared to people currently living in a city of Tampere.
- elif 3y agoPersonally I'm rooting for the future where a fleet of falcon 9's launch escape velocity stage 2's that head straight for the sun. Underground is nice until you get radioactive groundwater. The time cost of 100k years of maintaining safety seems more than the financial cost of maintaining a F9 fleet and disposing of second stages.
- lm28469 3y agoUntil one of them fails to launch or reach orbit
- ttul 3y agoMy engineering students explored this idea for a project. It turns out that sending something into the sun is really difficult. You have to overcome the velocity of planet earth orbiting the sun, which means you need a delta-V of 8.8 km/s to get the waste into a high orbit above the sun, followed by another burn to reduce its velocity to zero at that orbit. That’s the same delta-V as going to Jupiter. You would need a lot of rockets.
- spywaregorilla 3y agoHow many falcon 9's would that require?
- xnx 3y ago"...it's surprisingly hard to actually go to the Sun: It takes 55 times more energy to go to the Sun than it does to go to Mars. Why is it so difficult? The answer lies in the same fact that keeps Earth from plunging into the Sun: Our planet is traveling very fast — about 67,000 miles per hour — almost entirely sideways relative to the Sun. The only way to get to the Sun is to cancel that sideways motion." https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/its-surprisingly-hard-to-go-to-the-sun https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/its-surprisingly-h...
- ilyt 3y agouse solar sail to break into the sun ?
- 3y ago
- fwlr 3y agoI do think the borehole plan (3km deep, rather than 400m deep) is better, although it is more speculative and this proposal has the overwhelming advantage that it’s being enacted.
- karaterobot 3y agoAgreed; perfect is the enemy of the good in this arena. We just need someone to do something first, to make it easier for the second group, and the third, who can then offer some improvement to the process without having to overcome the same level of NIMBY challenges. NIMBY may not be the right acronym. Not In My Very Remote, Geologically Stable Bunker System.
- fwlr 3y agoA friend coined a useful sibling acronym for when NIMBY doesn’t quite fit - NOME, Not On My Earth. I quite like how it highlights the claim being laid to the whole planet (one can of course view climate change as a justification for this claim).
- plastic3169 3y agoThere is nice arty documentary film ”Into eternity” about Onkalo (made already 2010) https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=ayLxB9fV2y4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=ayLxB9fV2y4
- pfdietz 3y agoIf we're burying spent fuel, that's a tacit admission that nuclear will not be powering the world, because a once-through fuel cycle with thermal reactors (like the ones used in Finland) powering the world runs out of cheap uranium very quickly. In any case, the lack of a geological repository for commercial high level waste in the US is mostly because there's no stakeholder who really needs it. Storing spent fuel in dry casks is a perfectly cromulent solution -- and that waste could be buried or reprocessed later (more easily, after it cools more) so this doesn't rule out any other solution.
- soulbadguy 3y ago> the world runs out of cheap uranium very quickly. Citations ?
- pfdietz 3y agoWorld uranium resource information is readily available. For example: https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/uranium-resources/supply-of-uranium.aspx https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-c... gives a resource, as of 2017, of 8 million tonnes. Note that the recent expansion in uranium exploration didn't increase the resource very much. A 3000 MW(th) thermal burner reactor uses about 250 tonnes of natural uranium per year. https://material-properties.org/what-is-natural-uranium-consumption-in-a-nuclear-reactor-definition/ https://material-properties.org/what-is-natural-uranium-cons... To "power the world" (by which I mean provide, as heat, the 18 TW of current world primary energy consumption) would therefore require 6000 x 250 or 1.5 million tonnes of natural U per year. It has long (like, since shortly after WW2) been known that powering the world with fission will require some kind of breeding, which implies some kind of reprocessing. If you are committed to that, burying spent fuel as is makes no sense.
- pfdietz 3y agoThere's a question of how cheap "cheap" has to be. But saying "uranium cost doesn't matter because capital cost of the power plants is so much larger" is a left-handed argument.
- chrisbrandow 3y ago“ The digital emissions from this story are an estimated 1.2g to 3.6g CO2 per page view” I’m a little surprised that the emissions are so high per page view. I’ve never looked at co2 emission calculations for web pages before, but this seems a little high.
- ilyt 3y agonapkin math on https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11 0.855 pounds/0.38kg of CO2 per kWh. or 0.38g per Wh so 3.6g would be ~9.4 Wh, let's assume 10Wh Site takes ~700ms to render, . So it would need to consume the equivalent of over 5kW of compute for a second to get that amount of CO2 per view. That assuming it would be 100% load, and not just "waiting on various network RTTs" I think it's safe to assume it's pure bullshit, even including every device along the way
- Maxion 3y agoI don’t think that metric is just the power usage of the servers, it’s more likely that it also includes the other energy costs of the company and its employees, and how much effort went in to working on the article itself.
- penteract 3y agoIt's including the amount used by your machine while viewing the page, so if you're using a desktop with a 500W PSU (and you're using all 500W, which is probably an overestimate) and you spend a minute reading the article, that's 30kJ, which is roughly 1/2 a gram of methane[1], so roughly a gram of CO2 (more if it's coal, more if you take into account the fact that generators don't capture all the energy as electricity). [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane#Combustion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane#Combustion
- loeg 3y agoIt's insane to estimate 500W average load for reading a webpage.
- mikrl 3y agoThe ancient Egyptians couldn’t bury their royalty for 10K years, but I applaud this engineering project and hope it goes well for Finland.
- Moldoteck 3y agoI don't get something so maybe somebody can explain. Afaik, France has nuclear reprocessing plant, basically they take used fuel, separate nonrecyclable parts and get new fuel to be used again in their reactors. Why other countries don't send their used fuel to France for reprocessing? Is it too expensive? Too dangerous to transport? limited capacity of the plant? Or that the produced fuel can't be used in reactors from other countries? Also, why don't other countries build similar plants?
- Symbiote 3y agoSee the start of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Hague_site https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Hague_site
- mongol 3y agoSince the fuel will be encased in copper, and copper is quite valuable, I see a future, some centuries or millenia from now, where people will try to steal it, without realizing the dangers associated. With bad side effects as consequence.
- credit_guy 3y agoAnd how exactly will they know where to steal it from? Are they going to start digging random holes through bedrock just because they might hit treasure?
- 36364949thrw 3y agoI plan on passing the location down to my descendents. Each generation is to warn the next to not disclose the location, and to be patient as this is a long term plan. In a thousands years or so my clan will start digging at the exact location. They will venerate me and build temples to my memory.
- mongol 3y agoIt may not be hard at all. Knowledge may be preserved because civilization has preserved it in books and/or memory.
- voidfunc 3y agoEh, assumes copper will be valuable in that time frame. Unknowable.
- tedunangst 3y agoSo a few copper thieves get radiation poisoning? How bad is that, really? It seems like all nuclear waste doomerism is based on the same assumption that at some point in the future all of humanity is reduced to 100 individuals and all of them decide to dig into the same mine shaft.
- justsomehnguy 3y ago> How bad is that, really? They wouldn't die outright, see Goiânia accident. But honestly, if the future mankind would lose it knowledge about such place and it's dangers and would get a lesson... then it would get a lesson.
- roughly 3y agoStewart Brand has an interesting take on this in Whole Earth Discipline (which is quite a read) - this is energy we don't know how to use yet. In 100 years, we'll be digging this stuff right up again, because there's energy in there. I'm not typically as utopian - techno or otherwise - as Brand, but I agree with him here - the nuclear industry is less than a century old, and we've already got a pretty good idea how to get enough energy from this fuel to not have a 100k year problem to begin with. Kicking the can down the road a couple decades might actually be the right thing to do here.
- gtvwill 3y agoLess common side of the argument a friend presented to me. We shouldn't use nuclear in mainstream use cases now because we don't harness enough of its power. We're basically depleting a future fuel supply before we even know how to use it properly. It has more value to us in the future when utilization is at higher %. Personally not sure which side of the fence I sit on. It definitely has benefits now, but we also have capacity to make do with other shit. If we make do with other stuff will we forget about it and never get to that higher utilization point? I found it an interesting point. Wouldn't be the first time humans have made something extinct/disappear/rare before the true value of the thing is understood. Use now with low efficacy for mild gains. Save for future with bet on higher efficiency and increased gains.
- cultofmetatron 3y agothe problem that argument is that we learn how to increase efficiency as a result of using it and building a supply chain around that resource. Just look at gas engines. a modern gas engine uses a fraction of the fuel of a model T to transport more weight faster to their destinations. What you're suggestion would be akin to saying we should avoid the model T and wait till the prius is available. without a car industry, we wouldn't have ever gotten the R&D to have a prius in the first place.
- pazimzadeh 3y agoI get your overall point, however it's the reverse: electric cars were around before gas-powered cars. And the first hybrid gas-electric car was made around 1898. https://www.energy.gov/articles/history-electric-car https://www.energy.gov/articles/history-electric-car
- thumbsup-_- 3y ago100k years. Reality is that in 50 years the fuel will start leaking and then the cost of securing the vicinity/repairs will be too high for anyone to bear. Govt will try to ignore scientific warnings while some politicians will criticize the govt for not doing anything while others will say it's a waste of money. After some pressure, the govt will start repair work but in a few years the cost of repairs will be 3-10x the original estimates and with no signs of leakage stopping. After another 5-10 years, the govt will decide to pull the plug and a blame game will begin. So, to summarize, we are not the species that can really plan for 100k years and have the conviction of maintaining those plans.
- est31 3y agoWe have some projects that have been continuously running for tens of thousands of years, like plant and animal breeding for example. Dogs for example originated tens of thousands of years ago. Compare this to running nuclear power plants and operating radioactive waste storage facilities. That we haven't done for even a single century. Already now we know way better how to build nuclear power plants than 40 years ago, and our knowledge is only improving. Personally I think we shouldn't bury any highly contaminant waste for the next 300 years, until we gain experience from the medium to low contaminant storage sites.
- teddyh 3y ago> the fuel will start leaking Do you believe the Simpsons view of radioactive waste being glowing, liquid goo?
- panick21_ 3y agoI just don't like this, a huge amount of money spent for nothing. This fuel can be managed just fine above ground. Yes maybe ever couple 100 years you might have to move it, who cares. If your society isn't capable managing nuclear waste then nobody will care anymore anyway. Also, this is not 'waste' there are interesting and unique materials there that might be relevant in the next 100+ years. Not to mention that there is still lots of energy that can be extracted. These projects are all huge waste of money and the nuclear waste buggyman is mostly just the biggest anti-nuclear marketing project. And a sadly successful one. In the US nuclear companies have spent money for waste disposal for 50 years, with lots of money hanging out in an account. But instead of doing things to actually process this waste, like advanced GenIV reactors they instead just stalemate politically over the idiotic Yucca Mountain and don't do anything. Billions blocked from making progress on technology. Canada, the only western country with half way non insane nuclear policies is finally actually slowly moving. Together with a company called Moltex Energy they are working on reprocessing CANDU fuel to be used in the SSR Reactor. If countries just worked together on this stuff instead of each country being tricked into digging a big unnecessary hole we could actually make clean energy, reduce the actual nuclear 'waste' to a incredibly tiny amount that can be easily managed.
- RobotToaster 3y agoIt reminds me of how "useless" gasoline used to be burnt off at oil wells to extract parrafin oil.
- otherme123 3y agoWe are still unable to properly recycle plastic. Nuclear fuel is a very well known product carefully crafted, nuclear waste is a corrosive mix of very different things, mainly everything near the reactor that isn't fuel (pipes, concrete, clothes, machinery...) that gets contaminated and you can't do anything with it except store away in a radioactive landfill. The used nuclear fuel is already being processed and reused. But we can't do much with a contaminated piece of steel except turn it to small pieces and store the more contaminated in a concrete brick, no "gasoline" to extract there.
- 3y ago
- throwaway69123 3y agoNuclear Waste is a lie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzQ3gFRj0Bc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzQ3gFRj0Bc
- anshumankmr 3y agoYes, I am wondering why other countries are not exploring this.
- dp-hackernews 3y agoThe Big Lie About Nuclear Waste https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzQ3gFRj0Bc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzQ3gFRj0Bc
- foverzar 3y agoCan't recycle anymore in Russia. I was honestly surprised to learn how big of an issue nuclear waste management is. Up to the point where people are actually reinforced in popular opinion, that nuclear waste is a dirty and an unmanageable problem. This isn't even really waste, there are lots of useful materials that you can extract or reprocess into other kinds of useful fuel for other types of reactor. Except after Chernobyl, almost no one actually bothered with developing proper infrastructure and production chains for nuclear industry.
- WalterBright 3y agoThe half-life of carbon 14 is 5,730 years. All living things are composed partially of carbon 14. But nobody worries about the radiation from it. Anything with a long half-life is emitting very, very little radiation. Anything with a short half-life isn't going to last long.
- crote 3y agoYou are forgetting concentration. C14 isn't a significant issue because only one in every trillion carbon atoms is C14 - the rest is stable. Meanwhile, high-level nuclear waste is a densely concentrated soup of spicy elements, all neatly packed together to provide a really bad day to anyone stumbling onto it.
- WalterBright 3y agoIf it's densely concentrated, it can be spread out. If it's concentrated enough, it's still a source of usable energy.
- ben_w 3y agoWith an unfortunate chasm between the two: the "immediate coma, you don't wake up before you bleed to death everywhere inside and out" level of radiation is an absorbed dose of a mere few tens of joules of ionising radiation per kilogram of body mass.
- flangola7 3y agoThe sun deposits over a thousand joules every second onto every square meter.
- ben_w 3y agoI put the words "ionising radiation" in specifically to avoid this kind of well, actually. Almost none of the sunlight that gets through the air is ionising, and yet despite the biological defences aimed specifically at what remains, sunlight still gives us cancers in the exposed areas.
- Animats 3y agoThe US once had a similar plan. In addition to Yucca Mountain, there was to be an east coast depository, somewhere in a hard-rock mountain. Vermont was suggested. There are many hard rock mountains in the world where the geology hasn't done much in millions of years. This really isn't that hard to do.
- deafpolygon 3y agoThis is the start of every awesome horror film. Can't wait for the sequel!
- alexcombessie 3y agoIt’s a great milestone to establish a complete & safe lifecycle for nuclear fuel. From what I understood of current technology, recycling used nuclear fuel is too expensive and impractical today, so it makes economic sense to invest in long-term waste storage. But I do wonder if in 30-50 years, the main way to deal with nuclear waste would be recycling. I saw an interesting interview of experts about this last month: https://youtu.be/IzQ3gFRj0Bc https://youtu.be/IzQ3gFRj0Bc
- based2 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Wall_(TV_drama) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Wall_(TV_drama)
- Trencin 3y agoWhat happens when we've filled every nook and cranny of the earth with our poison? Is this the gift we are leaving for posterity? What about "do no harm" instead? Looking for advancements in authentically environmentally friendly technologies. The dissonance of I'm driving a Tesla and I'm saving the world! Instead of filling the air with poison, we're filling the bedrock with it.
- van8902 3y ago[flagged]
- van8902 3y ago[flagged]
- robert8923 3y ago[flagged]
- robert8923 3y ago[flagged]
- practice8912 3y ago[flagged]
- practice8912 3y ago[flagged]
- chemist823 3y ago[flagged]
- chemist823 3y ago[flagged]
- lazyboy892 3y ago[flagged]
- lazyboy892 3y ago[flagged]
- jullie23 3y ago[dead]
- jullie23 3y ago[dead]
- anen2031 3y ago[flagged]
- anen2031 3y ago[flagged]
- tom901 3y ago[flagged]
- tom901 3y ago[flagged]
- thomas9012 3y ago[dead]
- thomas9012 3y ago[dead]
- calvin982 3y ago[dead]
- calvin982 3y ago[dead]
- slack92 3y ago[dead]
- slack92 3y ago[dead]
- harry829 3y ago[dead]
- harry829 3y ago[dead]
- potter092 3y ago[dead]
- potter092 3y ago[dead]
- bulk91 3y ago[flagged]
- bulk91 3y ago[flagged]
- soninlaw01 3y ago[flagged]
- soninlaw01 3y ago[flagged]
- kitty234 3y ago[flagged]
- kitty234 3y ago[flagged]
- tyson32 3y ago[flagged]
- tyson32 3y ago[flagged]
- cat982 3y ago[flagged]
- cat982 3y ago[flagged]
- cripto34 3y ago[flagged]
- cripto34 3y ago[flagged]
- henry02 3y ago[flagged]
- henry02 3y ago[flagged]
- chok823 3y ago[flagged]
- chok823 3y ago[flagged]
- dear923 3y ago[flagged]
- dear923 3y ago[flagged]
- tom323 3y ago[flagged]
- tom323 3y ago[flagged]
- jerry2398 3y ago[flagged]
- jerry2398 3y ago[flagged]
- red92 3y ago[flagged]
- red92 3y ago[flagged]
- right32 3y ago[flagged]
- right32 3y ago[flagged]
- manyyears23 3y ago[flagged]
- manyyears23 3y ago[flagged]
- old322 3y ago[flagged]
- old322 3y ago[flagged]
- today9872 3y ago[flagged]
- today9872 3y ago[flagged]
- day92 3y ago[flagged]
- day92 3y ago[flagged]
- valentina902 3y ago[flagged]
- valentina902 3y ago[flagged]
- cosmonaut034 3y ago[flagged]
- cosmonaut034 3y ago[flagged]
- bye892 3y ago[flagged]
- bye892 3y ago[flagged]
- place821 3y ago[flagged]
- pink8091 3y ago[flagged]
- pink8091 3y ago[flagged]
- place821 3y ago[flagged]
- place821 3y ago[flagged]
- white91 3y ago[flagged]
- white91 3y ago[flagged]
- green23 3y ago[dead]
- green23 3y ago[dead]
- people243 3y ago[flagged]
- people243 3y ago[flagged]
- black92 3y ago[flagged]
- black92 3y ago[flagged]
- dad82 3y ago[flagged]
- dad82 3y ago[flagged]
- mom82 3y ago[flagged]
- mom82 3y ago[flagged]
- momy02 3y ago[flagged]
- momy02 3y ago[flagged]
- crazy823 3y ago[flagged]
- crazy823 3y ago[flagged]
- place821 3y ago[flagged]
- place821 3y ago[flagged]
- henry903 3y ago[flagged]
- henry903 3y ago[flagged]
- henry903 3y ago[flagged]
- henry903 3y ago[flagged]
- henry903 3y ago[flagged]
- father93 3y ago[dead]
- father93 3y ago[dead]
- thomas7812 3y ago[flagged]
- thomas7812 3y ago[flagged]
- classmate82 3y ago[flagged]
- classmate82 3y ago[flagged]
- day821 3y ago[flagged]
- day821 3y ago[flagged]
- night32 3y ago[flagged]
- night32 3y ago[flagged]
- dark232 3y ago[flagged]
- dark232 3y ago[flagged]
- alex82 3y ago[flagged]
- alex82 3y ago[flagged]
- friend22 3y ago[flagged]
- friend22 3y ago[flagged]
- funny921 3y ago[flagged]
- funny921 3y ago[flagged]
- Pic45 3y ago[dead]
- writefish 3y ago[dead]
- writefish 3y ago[dead]
- wigmoccasins 3y ago[dead]
- wigmoccasins 3y ago[dead]
- robinunkempt 3y ago[dead]
- robinunkempt 3y ago[dead]
- hoeogre 3y ago[dead]
- hoeogre 3y ago[dead]
- glovesregal 3y ago[dead]
- glovesregal 3y ago[dead]
- cretin34 3y ago[dead]
- cretin34 3y ago[dead]
- unwritten32 3y ago[dead]
- unwritten32 3y ago[dead]
- looselink 3y ago[dead]
- looselink 3y ago[dead]
- Pic45 3y ago[dead]
- churchboing 3y ago[dead]
- churchboing 3y ago[dead]
- tuxedoguard 3y ago[dead]
- thornynetherite 3y ago[dead]
- thornynetherite 3y ago[dead]
- outfieldshare 3y ago[dead]
- outfieldshare 3y ago[dead]
- calculate23 3y ago[dead]
- calculate23 3y ago[dead]
- tuxedoguard 3y ago[dead]
- ferrethole 3y ago[dead]
- ferrethole 3y ago[dead]
- fiftydelayed 3y ago[dead]
- fiftydelayed 3y ago[dead]
- kingfupoke 3y ago[dead]
- kingfupoke 3y ago[dead]
- onerous21 3y ago[dead]
- onerous21 3y ago[dead]
- gleefulstrike 3y ago[dead]
- gleefulstrike 3y ago[dead]
- pinkllama 3y ago[dead]
- pinkllama 3y ago[dead]
- rnafoot 3y ago[dead]
- rnafoot 3y ago[dead]
- scheme43 3y ago[dead]
- scheme43 3y ago[dead]
- volleyball45 3y ago[dead]
- volleyball45 3y ago[dead]
- eve43 3y ago[dead]
- eve43 3y ago[dead]
- royallepe 3y ago[dead]
- royallepe 3y ago[dead]
- deercroissant 3y ago[dead]
- deercroissant 3y ago[dead]
- northwoozy 3y ago[dead]
- northwoozy 3y ago[dead]
- scorched67 3y ago[dead]
- scorched67 3y ago[dead]
- forestay56 3y ago[dead]
- forestay56 3y ago[dead]
- sailorpetty 3y ago[dead]
- sailorpetty 3y ago[dead]
- squeamish3 3y ago[dead]
- squeamish3 3y ago[dead]
- referavoid 3y ago[dead]
- referavoid 3y ago[dead]