BREAKING: The E-Cat has been replicated—here’s the recipe!

Schematic view of MFMP's reactor, called 'glowstick' (click on image).

Schematic view of MFMP’s reactor, called ‘glowstick’.

The ‘open science’ group, Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project, MFMP, that I mention at the end of my book An Impossible Invention, has announced that they have performed a true replication of the effect in Rossi’s energy device, the E-Cat. The group has also published a complete recipe of how to replicate the effect, adding a clear method for detecting a successful replication.

Update: Here’s a video from MFMP discussing the result.

In a letter to donors, MFMP’s writes:

“What we will share is that the way in which we discovered it and the journey of analysis (…) makes it virtually impossible to say that Rossi does not have what he claims. It also shows that, whilst he may have been optimistic in how fast this would play out, he has been telling the truth, quite openly for years. Not only that, nature itself has been telling the same story and it told us too.”

Bob Greenyer, co-founder of the group, explained to me that the successful replication was based on all available information MFMP had got from from experienced LENR researchers Francesco Piantelli and Francesco Celani, and from the Russian scientist Alexander Parkhomov who also claims to have replicated Rossi’s effect, as well as openly shared information by Andrea Rossi himself.

The main evidence for the effect in MFMP’s experiment is a combination of ‘excess heat’—i.e. thermal energy released from the reaction, beyond the input energy—and x-ray radiation—i.e. the same kind of low energy radiation used in medical radiography. Important is that the x-ray emissions were observed only together with excess heat.

The character of the x-ray signal is, according to MFMP, the best way to detect that the replication is successful. The energy of the x-ray photons are between 0 and 300 keV (medical radiography typically uses x-rays between 5 and 150 keV), and there’s a brief but massive burst of x-rays when the reaction starts. This was observed also at the first semi-public demonstration of the E-Cat by Rossi in January 2011.

The heat from Rossi’s devices supposedly comes directly from the reaction and from the low energy x-rays which are thermalised—turned into harmless heat—by shielding materials such as lead.

The experiments by MFMP have been performed during the last three weeks, with a duration of about 20 hours of excess heat/x-rays on February 1-2. Everything is publicly documented at MFMP’s website, also the recipe, which essentially explains how to prepare the fuel consisting of nickel, lithium, hydrogen and aluminium, and how to run the experiment.

The preparation is fairly complicated and probably requires significant practice to master. It must be underlined that attempts should only be undertaken by trained people and with all necessary safety measures in place.

MFMP now plans to do follow-up experiments with the isotope Ni62 (an isotope is a special variety of any element, with the number indicating the number of nucleons in the atomic nucleus) which might enhance the effect.

In the following months, we should also expect an increased activity of replication attempts all over the world, possibly leading to a broad confirmation of the effect in Rossi’s E-Cat. On the other hand, it can be noted that Rossi had this knowledge already some five or six years ago, and reasonably has been able to further develop the process since.

I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate MFMP for its achievement, as a result of intense efforts, supported by a large group of donors and people offering their advice. As MFMP ends the letter to the donors:

“We did it. We lit the New Fire Together!”


Here’s the complete letter to the donors from MFMP:

Dear Donor,
During ICCF-17 in South Korea, shortly following the sad death of Dr. Martin Fleischmann, it became abundantly clear to a group of fresh attendees that the old approach to science, combined with the ostracisation of the great minds that had worked in the face of ridicule, was not delivering on the promise of of what we immediately called, “The New Fire”.
It also was clear that there was something to investigate and we were morally bound to do it.
We said that people would not believe, until they could experience it as if they were doing themselves and so the idea of Live Open Science was born. That was not enough, it had to be an effort that was free from commercial or government interests and that result and so it had to be conducted by the people, for the people. Our journey was made possible by the courage of Francesco Celani and we thank him profusely.
Your donations played a critical role in realising this vision, but you know that, what we know you will want to hear is what we have to share tomorrow.
We have been running and analysing an experiment live over the past Month. First for us in this experiment were:
– Parkhomov Baking of Ni(correctly done)
– Pre Hydrogenation of Ni
– Proper baking out of cell under vacuum
– Parkhomov pressure
– Piantelli de-oxygenation
– Piantelli ‘loading’ + proper dwell times
– Piantelli capture analogue
– Use of free Lithium
– Use of calibrated NaI
– Cycles attempting to create nano Ni distillates (inspired by “Bang!” discovery of dissolved Ni)
– Long Run
You can see that there are steps in there that came about only because of activities that were made possible by donations. The critical visits to Piantelli and Parkhomov.
Around the beginning of the month we saw what appeared to be up to a COP of 1.2, not earth shattering, but sustained and robust and in line with both observations by others and the Lugano report when adjusted for correct emissivity. Over the next weeks we tried various bookend calibrations which supported this finding.
We have said that only two paths would satisfy us:
Statistically significant Isotopic or elemental shifts from Fuel to Ash
Statistically significant emissions commensurate, correlating, or anti correlating to excess heat
We are happy to tell you that we believe we have satisfied our condition 2, yet of course we’d like to replicate ourselves. Actually, though, it goes much further than that. What we will share is that the way in which we discovered it and the journey of analysis that makes it virtually impossible to say that Rossi does not have what he claims. It also shows that, whilst he may have been optimistic in how fast this would play out, he has been telling the truth, quite openly for years. Not only that, nature itself has been telling the same story and it told us too.
By the 16/02/2016 we had given up trying to destroy the *GlowStick* 5.2, part of a long lineage of []=Project Dog Bone=[] experiments. After the reactor was turned off, Alan shared the remainder of the data files from the NaI scintillator kindly donated by a project follower called Stephen (Thankyou Stephen, really).
Project follower and open science legend, Ecco, first took a look at the data and found some anomalies – one SO striking that we thought there had been an equipment failure. We did not know the time that the anomalies occurred and had to wait until Alan woke to explain the time stamps so we could correlate it with the thermal and power data published live to HUGNet (Thankyou Ryan and Paul Hunt).
To our extreme surprise, the onset of excess heat followed the massive anomaly in emissions and the minor anomalies were during and only during excess heat.
This led us on a path of discovery, the sequence of which explains:
The massive count signal discovered by Francesco Celani during Rossi’s first public demo
How Rossi knew his reactor had started
How the E-Cat generates excess heat
How it self sustains
How it can scale easily
That it is safe
It also showed us how replicators can know they have succeeded in triggering the New Fire and how to enhance the excess heat.
Subsequent to this, we found out Rossi had travelled the same design journey and had publicly shared it in the past.
The irony is – this was all being conducted live in the open, including discussions and graphing, whilst people were distracted with news of the end of the 1MW 1 year test. Same day…
In the past week we have been checking, cross checking to verify and this morning we cleared our last serious doubt, again live, with shared data. Because this is already in the open we want people to know so that they can start replicating based on what works, moreover, the insight will allow people to immediately start improving on our results.
Thank you for making this possible
We did it
We lit the New Fire Together!


And here’s the recipe in short form, as published by MFMP on February 24, 2016. For further details, please visit

Prepare thoroughly (Ni + LiAlH4 + Li)

1. Bake Ni
2. Reduce Ni
3. Hydrogenate Ni
4. Mix: Ni + LiAlH4 + Li
5. Bake and vac reactor, add Mix, vac warm, add H2, Vac
6. Heat to above Mössbauer determined Ni Debye (say 135C), pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
7. Hold, pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
8. Heat slowly to as close to Ni Curie as comfortable (Say 340C), pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
9. Hold, pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
10. Slowly lower temp to above highest known Ni Debye (Say 220C), pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
11. Hold, pressure regulated to approx 1bar abs.
12. Go as fast as possible through Ni Curie
13. Hold, pressure regulated to approx 0.5bar abs.
14. Cycle through 500C internal, pressure regulated to approx 0.5bar abs.
15. Hold, pressure regulated to approx 0.5bar abs.
16. Raise internal temperature to over 1200, pressure regulated to approx 0.5bar abs.
17. Drop to around 1000C and hold, pressure regulated to approx 0.5bar abs.
18. Raise internal temperature to near boiling point of Lithium

Some of the above steps may in time be redundant.

1h Thermal > x/β- (0-100KeV) emissions thermalised in Lead > IR/THz (via blackbody) > 5h (SSM)

where ‘>’ means ‘leads to’



  1. “Mary”, I’m talking about X-rays because that is what Cook, Piantelli, MFMP claim is emitted.

    When people talk about <300keV Gammas, they really mean X-rays: the boundary is indistinct. But this is the reason why you should use an X-ray attenuation calculator. They have less energy and are more easily absorbed. The only person producing FUD regarding "Gamma rays" is you.

    If you don't understand the facts above, I am not surprised that "little of what Rossi says makes sense" to you.

  2. @KTD

    Your ability to read and comprehend seems very limited. You need not use Google to determine that I have little information about nuclear physics. I TOLD YOU SO in my previous post.

    Rossi has made many incompatible and ridiculous claims. One of them is that the ecats are heated by thermalization of gamma radiation, implying that this is their SOLE source of heat. I maintain that if this is true, it involves enough radiation that a few mm. of lead which are possible in small ecats, would not be sufficient to shield the experimenters. Rossi also claims there is no detectable radiation when the ecat is in operation and making heat. That is ALSO incompatible with the heat source being thermalization of gamma radiation. SOME radiation would get through and be detectable.

    When Rossi first started, he said that nickel was transmuted to copper and that was the source of the heat in the ecats. Later, he said nickel was only a catalyst (look up “catalyst” if you don’t know what it means). Now, there is some idiotic theory being floated about nickel-62 being the fuel rather than the ash. Actually NONE of the explanations makes the slightest sense and you don’t have to be a nuclear physicist to understand that. Also the explanations are incompatible with each other.

    I don’t know why I need an X-ray attenuation calculator. I don’t know why you keep referring to X-rays. Gamma rays are not X-rays. In general, they differ in wavelength, frequency and photon energy. You don’t need to be a nuclear physicist to know that.

    Basically, nothing Rossi says or does really makes sense. Certainly squatting in a shipping container for a year with a collection of gear makes no sense at all if you are trying to prove that the hot cat works. It can be done in a week yet Rossi never managed to pin that down properly and the Swedish scientists he gave the job to grossly botched it and now won’t reply to simple, polite questions. That is certainly a confidence builder, isn’t it?

    Starting your own production company with a few million dollars, as Rossi announced several times over the last five years, makes no sense at all either. Anyone with a double digit IQ would license the product, if there were a product, to huge companies ready to make products. Nor is this a risk if Rossi’s patent is really protective. Products are licensed to big companies all the time. All sorts of products. Nobody knows who Domenico Fioravanti is and nobody ever interviewed him. Nobody knows who the military customer from 2011 is much less the current one. None of Rossi’s tests are valid though he could easily have made them valid. Ash containing entirely Ni-62 makes no sense either. In fact NOTHING about this whole story makes sense and yet it has gone on for five years now. Rossi must be ROTFWL! I certainly am.

  3. Yugo: Instead I googled “Mary Yugo Outed” (without quotes), the results were very interesting.

    Bit of a schoolboy error on your part I think… This is why no one takes your denials seriously.

    It’s very clear to me that nuclear physics is not your field. Although again, some googling can confirm this.

    The point is that you don’t get kW’s of heat from 300keV radiation, there only appears to be a short burst as the reaction starts, as suggested by Celani, Piantelli and MFMP.

    In the case of the HotCat tested in Lugano, the reactor body could just have contained a 2mm thick Tungsten tube (seemingly confirmed by Cook), which would have reduced <300keV photons to background levels.

    Here's an x-ray attenuation calculator, so you can start taking some first steps towards quantifying your own limited understanding:

  4. @KTD

    OK… I again Googled “thermalization of gamma” (with quotes, as it should be). The first and second return are about Rossi related claims as you can see. The next two are questions on astronomy exams and presumably have to with processes in stars! The next two returns are Rossi related (Homlid and “ponderomotive force”) and the one after that is astronomy again. So out of the first seven returns, four are Rossi, three are astronomy, NONE are relevant to my question. Want to split some hairs again?

    Where is an industrial or research application here on earth? Where is any practical process using this mechanism? Isn’t it something else Rossi made up out of nothing like he always does?

  5. @KTD

    I already said, nuclear physics is not my field so I am not sure what calculations you are asking for. None are needed though because shielding information is provided on the internet as tables and graphs included in the links I provided.

    And then, there is your own information. 50 mm. of lead to shield from 300 keV radiation? OK. Let’s take that on faith since you failed to provide a reference (after you asked me for links).

    Where are 50 mm (appx 2″ thick) of lead in the original ecat? In the hot cat? And now your turn to calculate. How do you get kilowatts of thermalized heat from 300 keV radiation? What volume of lead is required for that? If thermalization of gamma is used in practice ANYWHERE to evolve heat energy for practical applications, I am sure you can easily find the calculation or graph on the internet, can you not? Or perhaps our genius, Rossi, invented that too?

  6. Unfortunately MFMP has terribly overhyped this whole thing.
    All they have is a tiny signal and no confirmed excess heat. Not much ground to claim that they replicated the Rossi effect. Actually Rossi nor the Lugano-team have shown radiation measurements that match “The Signal” of MFMP, so how can you claim a replication anyway…

    I have great respect for the enthusiast MFMP guys and think they are doing a very good job in promoting open science, but they do not seem very focused on just replicating Lugano or Parkhomov to confirm or rebuke the excess heat measurements.
    But maybe that is my engineering background. Engineers are almost by definition far more goal driven than scientists, just compare Rossi with Piantelli.

    PS: You may want to follow the discussions on this radiation signal on Vortex , very interesting.

  7. YUGO: “If you Google “thermalization of gamma”, the returns are almost entirely with reference to claims for Rossi.”

    YUGO: “The point, which as usual you fail to grasp, about the Google search for thermalization or thermalisation of gamma radiation is that nothing which comes up has anything to do with any industrial heating application.”

    Which is the truth Yugo? Make your mind up, and try to be consistent.

    And you still don’t offer any calculations to back up your assertions. You are a Pseud,

  8. Hysterical much, KTD? Here is a source document on shielding from gamma:

    Here is some shielding that works:

    See anything like that in any of Rossi’s kludges?

    Here’s another reference for shield design:

    There is no way to put enough lead in any Rossi device to shield anything, except for maybe the so-called Ottoman ecat. And nobody knows what was inside that other than an electrical heater.

    The point, which as usual you fail to grasp, about the Google search for thermalization or thermalisation of gamma radiation is that nothing which comes up has anything to do with any industrial heating application. Sure, when you absorb gamma rays into shielding materials, it makes heat. But to make enough heat to fit the ecat claims, you’d have to have such intense radiation that a) it would be easily detected (and Rossi denies any radiation detectable from any ecat) and b) it would be dangerous. There is absolutely no way that any Rossi device makes the claimed heat from thermalizing gamma radiation. If you doubt me on this, try talking to a nuclear physicist or engineer about it. Let me know what you get.

    You can rest easy. Rossi’s ecats make no radiation more dangerous than the infrared heat you get from a bathroom electrical heater — because that is all they are.

  9. Mary Yugo said: “If you Google “thermalization of gamma”, the returns are almost entirely with reference to claims for Rossi”.

    What utter nonsense! Do you think that nobody notices your lies? On the first four pages of Google there are only four Rossi related pages. One of them is this page.

    In response to being asked to show some calculations, Mary Yogo said: “Hi KTD. I went through the search to find where I saw that if the energy purported to come from the ecat originated in “thermalized” gamma radiation, it would take a LOT of lead to shield it but I did not flag the source and I am not searching it again”.

    TRANSLATION: “I didn’t do any calculations, instead I prefer to make things up based on obscure websites, trust me on this one”

  10. @MY
    My sun glasses work. That’s radiation, from the sun, being blocked by plastic.

    Ohhh. You are talking about very high energy MeV gammas, not low energy levels, like optical range gammas, something which could easily be blocked by thin stainless steel, or lead, or water. Just like Rossi has said since 2010.

    Making enough of them (and/or downshifting them to IR) to actually heat anything… well that is another story.

  11. How much shielding is required will much depend on the amount of x-rays.

    Tube styles monitors and TV’s (CRT) have about 5 pounds of lead to contain the x-rays. So not a lot of shielding is required.

    In the late 1960’s some GE TV’s had bad voltage regulators and they would allow too high of a voltage – those TV’s were recalled due to them emitting x-rays.

    So, not a lot of lead is required in above examples, but it is certainly surprising that capture of x-rays into lead would be a main source of heating for LENR devices. Most interesting this x-ray discovery.

    None the less MFMP achievement is great news for LENR, and another hammer against the skeptics of LENR.

    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  12. Shielding doesn’t stop radiation — it attenuates it by a fixed amount depending on the nature of the radiation and the shield. Here is a typical specification to decrease gamma radiation by a factor of one billion (ten to the ninth):

    “To reduce typical gamma rays by a factor of a billion, thicknesses of stop-gamma shield needs to be about 13.8 feet of water, about 6.6 feet of concrete, or about 1.3 feet of lead. Thick, dense shielding is necessary to protect against gamma rays. The higher the energy of the gamma ray, the thicker the shield must be. ”

    I do not think anything Rossi made operates by converting gamma rays to heat. I don’t know of anything that does work that way, do you? Nuclear reactors of the fission type generate heat directly from loss of mass during the splitting of an atom. What device do you know which generates heat by “thermalization”? You can educate me here — I don’t know much about nuclear physics except what I read.

    If Rossi reactors make gamma radiation, why doesn’t *some* of it get through. As noted above, attenuation is a ratio. It is not absolute. And modern radiation detectors are extremely sensitive.

    If you Google “thermalization of gamma”, the returns are almost entirely with reference to claims for Rossi.

    I think energy from thermalization of gamma radiation in Rossi devices is simply more bullpucky from Rossi. And now, he is recycling the silly idea of million unit a year robotized plants, promoting the newer and more efficient ecatX which has been sold, now, to some unknown customer. Customers, certificators and referees are always anonymous with Rossi. By the way, who was the NATO colonel ( “Domenico Fioravanti” was it?) who supposedly represented Rossi’s 2011 mystery customer for the megawatt “plant”?
    Four years later and nothing ever from him or the customer about the plant? Whatever happened to that customer who now supposedly has had four years to test the plant? You people who believe Rossi never wonder or ask about that? It’s all straight out of the playbook of the classic energy scam.

  13. Mats, I think it is hilarious that those who seem to object to my use of a pseudonym and seem to have a stalker’s fascination with who I might be in real life… they ALSO post with a pseudonym! ROTFWL! The other issue about this is that it doesn’t help their case — it hurts it — if I am, in fact, a real world expert on calorimetry and a vice president in a thermal instrument company! But then people who write that sort of thing clearly aren’t very bright.

  14. Hi everyone, lately there were a few comments posted that were approaching personal attacks, which is not allowed here. The comments have been canceled.

  15. Hi KTD. I went through the search to find where I saw that if the energy purported to come from the ecat originated in “thermalized” gamma radiation, it would take a LOT of lead to shield it but I did not flag the source and I am not searching it again.

    Of course, if Rossi generated gamma radiation, it would be trivial to demonstrate it’s there and he never has so I suspect the whole thermalization nonsense is just more Rossifiction.

    Hi Mark. All I can say is I am breathless from your brilliance. I am sure if I am really George Hody, it makes a powerful case for Rossi being real, right? Keep up the good work. With friends like you, Rossi needs no enemas.

  16. Gee, George Hody, I find it very interesting that you continue to post under the name “Mary Yugo,” or some variant, despite the fact that there is a broad consensus, among those who have been paying attention, that your real name is George Hody. I also find it very interesting, George Hody, that you have never specifically denied that you are, indeed, George Hody, at least, as best I can tell. However, George Hody, if you publicly acknowledged, at some point, that you are George Hody, then you can say so, if you want. Also, George Hody, on the small chance that the person posting under the “Mary Yugo” name is not George Hody, and the person posting under the “Mary Yugo” name has revealed his or her true identity, then you can say that, as well. However, George Hody, it seems pretty unlikely, to me, that “Mary Yugo” and George Hody are not the same person, given the information in this article, linked to, below:

  17. Maryyugo, check a video that Bob Greenyer will post within a few days. He explains the function of the lead for SSM. You may understand, if you want to.

  18. Mary Yugo ranted: “It would take a huge amount of lead to shield from gammas of any substantial energy”

    Nonsense… Show your calculations.

  19. @Becktemba

    I suppose you were joking? Anyway, my ability to test by calorimetry is only for claims of high power LENR. I am no expert in detection of radiation and I am not interested in experiments which purport to produce tiny amounts of heat.

  20. “You’re wrong Maryyugo. The big old Ecat weighed 98kg, mostly empty, I saw inside.”

    Yes, that was what NASA jokingly called the “ottoman” ecat. I was talking about this one:

    … and I see no room for much lead in it. Also, so far, it was the most powerful ecat and the one with the largest COP, if you believe Levi, of course.

    “The hot cat had another shielding material.”

    Where could they put a substantial shield in that tube furnace of Rossi’s? What was the shielding material?

    This whole business of Rossi thermalizing gamma radiation with small amounts of lead is silly anyway. I am not a nuclear physicist but I looked up shielding from gamma and also thermalization. It would take a huge amount of lead to shield from gammas of any substantial energy, certainly from gamma radiation sufficient to thermalize into kilowatts as the ecats are alleged to provide. And the amount of radiation which got through would fry the experimenters.

  21. No Peter, I have no plans to try replication. But maybe people who already work with replication attempts will try to use this info.

  22. “also expect an increased activity of replication attempts ”

    In the scientific method peer review is when another lab attempts to replicate your published work. To be published, in print, in a journal is old fashioned, archaic. That form of publishing/peer review is sort of silly and problematic. Silly in that anyone can publish on the net, believe me, it will be reviewed critiqued like we do with Mary Yugo. Problematic in that when forging a new path forward who is your peer?

    If NyTeknik had a proper scientific peer review they would be attempting to replicate this experiment themselves.

  23. Mats, are you planning on trying to replicate the MFMP process by yourself? Perhaps you could collect a group of scientists to replicate the results so that we can get the result peer reviewed and published for a broader audience. Hanno Essen, Roland Pettersson, et. al. maybe could be interested?

  24. Thanks for your concern Buck, but I asked for the leave myself for other reasons, to be able to dedicate to my own activities as speaker, author and moderator. And to this field. Feels just right now!

  25. You’re wrong Maryyugo. The big old Ecat weighed 98kg, mostly empty, I saw inside. The hot cat had another shielding material.

  26. Except that no Rossi ecat has had enough room to put lead into — certainly not the original, badly tested by Lewan, Essen and Kullander — you know the one where the main band heater could only heat the cooling water! And that tiny machine, according to Rossi and Lewan et. al. data, was the MOST efficient and MOST powerful ecat module ever made, as per Levi’s test published in NyTeknik. It was ten times better than the hot cat in terms of COP and absolute power output. And if there was any lead in that, the thickness would have to have been microscopic.

    Also, where is the lead in the hot cat?

  27. Mats,

    I’m sorry to hear of the one-year leave of absence from NyTeknik. It sounds similar to the fate of Mark Gibbs at Forbes.

    I guess you might say that the political repercussions centered on a missteps regarding LENR has been heightened for all involved.

    It reminds me of a similar situation with the TV news program 60 Minutes and how it initially succumbed to the pressure of Big Tobacco and prevented the airing of the Jeffry Wigand interview, a story that was eventually turned into a movie.

    Good Luck,

  28. Pekka, as far as I understand the burst was short, while the increased x-Ray you see in the graph was continuous while there was excess heat — according to Bob Greenyer for about 20 hrs.

  29. “Brief but massive” burst – OK, 2 hour time resolution and 5 times above background. While what Celani reported seeing, if it was real and not some artefact, was truly brief – seconds. In my opinion one cannot yet draw the conclusion that MFMP and Celani saw the same “burst” phenomenon.

  30. @Rip
    After my initial extensive reporting, Ny Teknik’s editors have become very careful, wanting to report further only if there are published and peer-reviewed results. Furthermore, I’m on a one-year leave of absence from Ny Teknik, so I’m not even there to argue for reporting.

  31. Ok, I would see as a the logical continuation of your previous reports…this is an indepedent support of the “fantastic” claims of Rossi. I mean the Rossi saga drew a lot of attention to NyTeknik. Are they afraid of negative reactions or is it really that its hard to understand? The first experiments by Rossi were not peer-reviewed either?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s