renewable report summary

Information about renewable report summary

Published on April 9, 2008

Author: Roxie

Source: authorstream.com

Content

Slide1:  Summary of Some Commonly-Referenced Reports on Renewable Generation Developed by the MPUC, August 2005 NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004:  NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004 Benefits from Renewables Reduced emissions (5%-7% reduction), health Diversity – reduced risk of price fluctuation and supply interruptions (9% reduction in oil/gas generation) Downward pressure on fossil fuel prices Economic impacts (jobs, local product purchases, added revenues to local economies, increased tax revenue) Reduced electric prices in some locations, not in others NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004:  NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004 Costs – retail - of increasing NY’s RPS from 20% to 25% Scenarios: - current vs lower gas price - cost-based vs. market clearing price approaches - location (congestion effect) NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004:  NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004 Average bill impacts in 2013, depending on scenario On a statewide basis, both gas price scenarios caused modest bill increases and both “approach” scenarios caused modest bill increases. Bill decreases were caused in some locations, by the congestion impact. NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004:  NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004 Costs – retail (continued) Scenario Annual 2013 impact cumulative NPV Under higher-gas-price scenarios, statewide cost decreases in yr 1, increases in yr 4, could do either in yr 8 Under lower-gas-price scenarios, statewide cost increases in all years NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004:  NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004 Cost – wholesale On a statewide basis, wholesale prices would decrease Scenario Annual 2013 impact NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004:  NY RPS Study, for NY DPS, Feb. 2004 Observations Study assumed plants would be built if justified by economics No ACM – study assumed supply would keep up with demand New renewables were specific to NY (e.g., upgraded Canadian hydro, upgrades to existing biomass) Renewables’ cost premiums ranged from 0.2¢ to 2.3¢ Large hydro (>30MW) and MSW not eligible Rhode Island GHG Action Plan Study, Tellus Institute, Feb. 2002:  Rhode Island GHG Action Plan Study, Tellus Institute, Feb. 2002 Costs of Future RI RPS: 10% RPS 15% RPS 20% RPS Rhode Island GHG Action Plan Study, Tellus Institute, Feb. 2002:  Rhode Island GHG Action Plan Study, Tellus Institute, Feb. 2002 Benefits Lower gas prices from reduced overall demand: - 10% RPS: 4¢/MMBtu (38¢ on res’l bill) - 20% RPS: 21¢/MMBtu ($2.00 on res’l bill) Emissions reduction, effect on region: - 10% RPS: $ 94 M (20-yr NPV) - 20% RPS: $343 M Rhode Island GHG Action Plan Study, Tellus Institute, Feb. 2002:  Rhode Island GHG Action Plan Study, Tellus Institute, Feb. 2002 Effect of higher or lower natural gas prices has minimal impact on cost of RPS (maximum 0.02¢/kWh) Scenarios: higher and lower gas prices, non-delivered imports allowed MA RPS: 2002 Cost Analysis Update, Sustainiable Energy Advantage & LaCapra, Dec. 2002:  MA RPS: 2002 Cost Analysis Update, Sustainiable Energy Advantage & LaCapra, Dec. 2002 Scenarios varied: - NY import costs - PTC - offshore wind timing - biomass fuel costs - green market development - LMP impact - cost of new facility financing MA RPS: 2002 Cost Analysis Update, Sustainiable Energy Advantage & LaCapra, Dec. 2002:  MA RPS: 2002 Cost Analysis Update, Sustainiable Energy Advantage & LaCapra, Dec. 2002 Costs Bill impacts: 0.20¢ - 0.35¢/kWh in 2003 0.01¢ - 0.45¢/kWh in 2012 Most significant cost drivers: - market price - financing assumptions - PTC - cost to import Energy Choices Revisited, for Mainewatch Institute, Feb. 1994:  Energy Choices Revisited, for Mainewatch Institute, Feb. 1994 Benefits from QF and Conservation Policies of late 80s (compared with 3 alternative scenarios) Economic development – new industries created 6,000 jobs Gross State Product – increased as much as $220M annually Air emissions – reduced by 2 – 6 M tons annually ($57M to $202M) Net benefit: $209M - $424M Occurred during economic recession. An upturn would increase benefits, decrease costs Energy Choices Revisited, for Mainewatch Institute, Feb. 1994:  Energy Choices Revisited, for Mainewatch Institute, Feb. 1994 Cost of QF and Conservation Policies of late 80s Electric rates higher by 4% - 12% In actuality, electric rates rose 36% Thus, actual rate increases were impacted by economic conditions and other factors more than by the QF/conservation policies Energy Choices Revisited, for Mainewatch Institute, Feb. 1994:  Energy Choices Revisited, for Mainewatch Institute, Feb. 1994 Net Impacts by Scenario Revenue Environmental Scenario Impact GSP Cost Net Benefit Scenarios assumed differing amounts of NUG and DSM activity, replaced with differing amounts of Seabrook, Sears Island, and Canadian generation. Energy Choices Revisited, for Mainewatch Institute, Feb. 1994 :  Energy Choices Revisited, for Mainewatch Institute, Feb. 1994 Implementation Recommendations Planning and investment is based on long-term projections of costs and demand Forecasts will be wrong Planning should minimize the consequence of error Climate Action Plan for Maine DEP, 2004 :  Climate Action Plan for Maine DEP, 2004 Recommendations Carbon offset requirements. New renewables qualify Cap and trade CO2 emissions SBC to raise funds Emission standards Support biomass generation through PTC Capture methane from landfill gas for generation Revise RPS. Increase percentage over time; limit resources if desired Incent use of biomass feedstock for biomass generation State government purchase electricity from renewables Incent CHP Incent solar water heaters Increase waste to energy generation Buydown for on-site solar PVs Climate Action Plan for Maine DEP, 2004:  Climate Action Plan for Maine DEP, 2004 Benefits from Renewables Reduced emissions; human health Increased security of energy supply Economic development; support for existing business Improved utilization of existing biomass feedstock Improved generation efficiency (CHP) Reduced emissions from landfills Climate Action Plan for Maine DEP, 2004:  Climate Action Plan for Maine DEP, 2004 Costs - measured in $ per Kmt (thousands of metric tons of carbon equivalent) in 2020 Offset Requirement: low cost Cap & Trade: high savings SBC: higher cost Emission standards: higher cost Subsidize biomass: low cost Landfill gas generation: low cost RPS: low cost Biomass feedstock: neutral State green purchase: high cost Incent CHP: high savings Incent solar water ht: moderate cost Waste to energy gen’n: mod-high cost Buydown on-site PVs: not estimated The Promotion of Renewable Resources, MPUC, Dec. 2003 :  The Promotion of Renewable Resources, MPUC, Dec. 2003 Recommendations, assuming Legislature wishes to encourage Revise RPS. Remove cogen, hydro>5MW, QFs; add new-renewables tier; add biomass/MSW tier; add tradable credits; add cost cap. Or: Implement SBC. Include fuels as for RPS. Fund biomass/MSW on per-kWh rate varying with market price. Fund other technologies by competitive bid. ME facilities only. Small generator aggregation, <5MW. The Promotion of Renewable Resources, MPUC, Dec. 2003:  The Promotion of Renewable Resources, MPUC, Dec. 2003 Benefits from Renewables Environmental Resource diversity – reduce over-reliance on fossil fuel; possibly reduce price volitility System reliability – voltage support, line losses, restarts Supply reliability (although unnecessary in short-term) Economic development – multiplier effect in wood products industry. Although, higher electricity prices negative. The Promotion of Renewable Resources, MPUC, Dec. 2003:  The Promotion of Renewable Resources, MPUC, Dec. 2003 Costs $0.025 ACM for new renewables, grow to 4% tier: maximum $11M cost $0.015 ACM for biomass and/or MSW, 10% tier: maximum $17M cost 0.1 mill/kWh SBC to fund small on-site applications: $1.1M The Promotion of Renewable Resources, MPUC, Dec. 2003:  The Promotion of Renewable Resources, MPUC, Dec. 2003 Implementation Recommendations Cost – consider impact on prices Commercial viability – support only resources that cannot compete without it Ratepayer payback – find means to pay back when resources become viable Resources – decide which to support, by fuel type, new vs. existing, established vs emerging IEPM Presentation Re: LD 1312, April 2003 :  IEPM Presentation Re: LD 1312, April 2003 Recommendations Revise RPS. Lower percentage; remove cogen, hydro >30MW, QFs; add new-renewables tier-2; add ACM. IEPM Presentation Re: LD 1312, April 2003:  IEPM Presentation Re: LD 1312, April 2003 Benefits from Renewables Economic benefits of in-state plants – jobs, secondary effects Economic benefits of wood products industry tied to biomass plants Reliable, environmentally benign way to dispose of mill residue and waste wood Ash bi-product used for farming Grid stability, voltage support Lower landfill volume Hydro highly regulated, with costs and controls (fish controls costly) Recreational benefits from hydro Generating facilities contribute to property tax revenue Biomass, MSW plants get DEP permits Reduction in slag, ash, CO2, SO2, NOx, particulates, hydrochloric acid Hedge against fossil fuel and nuclear prices IEPM Presentation Re: LD 1312, April 2003:  IEPM Presentation Re: LD 1312, April 2003 Quantified Benefits from Renewables (among IEPM members) 412 employees $13M local taxes paid 3.6M tons CO2 avoided 13,000 tons SO2 avoided 3,000 tons NOX avoided 3M tons wood residue consumed 9.6M barrels oil avoided IEPM Presentation Re: LD 1312, April 2003:  IEPM Presentation Re: LD 1312, April 2003 Costs Recommend: 2¢ tier 1 ACM; 3.5¢ tier 2 ACM. If RECs trade at 25% of ACM: average res’l bill increase = 80¢/month (for 1% tier 2) Locational marginal pricing savings (projected by MPUC): ave res’l bill savings = $2.00 to $2.80 Energy for Maine’s Future NRCM, MECEP, Mainewatch Institute, 2002 :  Energy for Maine’s Future NRCM, MECEP, Mainewatch Institute, 2002 Recommendations State leadership - Governor develop a renewable energy plan and means of coordinating energy policy and activities. State lead by example. PUC promote renewables. Revise RPS – target clean, renewable, sustainable energy. Promote both existing and new facilities. Develop green power choice for consumers. Establish siting guidelines and improved regulations for wind development. Support regional and national activities. Energy for Maine’s Future NRCM, MECEP, Mainewatch Institute, 2002:  Energy for Maine’s Future NRCM, MECEP, Mainewatch Institute, 2002 Benefits from Renewables Health benefits from reduced pollution Political instability in the Middle East - economic and security crises Global warming State Initiatives for Clean Energy Development for Mainewatch Institute, 2001 :  State Initiatives for Clean Energy Development for Mainewatch Institute, 2001 Recommendations Revise RPS. Remove cogen, MSW, hydro>30MW; retain biomass, landfill gas, digester gas; only in-state facilities if legal; add new-renewables tier; add tradable credits; add cost cap. Establish customer- or marketer-credits. Fund through 3-2-1 tax. Establish tax incentives for small facilities. E.g. property tax, BETR, sales tax, PTC. Fund through 3-2-1 tax. Reform regional transmission pricing. E.g. remove wheeling charges, exempt from congestion charges, allow renewables advocates a voice. State Initiatives for Clean Energy Development for Mainewatch Institute, 2001 :  State Initiatives for Clean Energy Development for Mainewatch Institute, 2001 Benefits from Renewables Employment benefits – supports 6,000 jobs in ME Economic benefits – millions of dollars impact Environmental benefits – air emissions Diversification as a hedge – reduce vulnerability from fluctuating gas prices Protection against supply disruptions State Initiatives for Clean Energy Development for Mainewatch Institute, 2001:  State Initiatives for Clean Energy Development for Mainewatch Institute, 2001 Costs Current RPS: 1 – 5 mils (early PUC estimate) Cost of a revised RPS unknowable in advance SBC of 1 mil (typical of other states): $12M 3-2-1 tax, 1999 ME generation mix: $12M revenue Customer credit for renewable gen’n, 1¢/kWh, 1% mkt penetration: $1.2M Customer credit for renewable gen’n, $150/customer, 1% mkt penetration: $1.1M The Real Story about Purchased Power in Maine, Alliance for a Renewable Maine Economy, March 1994:  The Real Story about Purchased Power in Maine, Alliance for a Renewable Maine Economy, March 1994 Benefits from Renewables and Cogeneration CMP pursued cogen/small power to: - reduce risks associated with large facilities - ensure diversity - ensure stability (domestic control) - obtain reliable energy at the lowest possible cost The Real Story about Purchased Power in Maine, Alliance for a Renewable Maine Economy, March 1994:  The Real Story about Purchased Power in Maine, Alliance for a Renewable Maine Economy, March 1994 Benefits from Renewables: Stabilizing price impact of QFs vs the alternatives (CMP) Many alternatives are now cancelled (Seabrook, Pilgrim, Sears Island, Hydro-Quebec): $31M Nuclear risk resulted in ratings downgrades: millions of dollars in higher interest QF rates increased 14% between ’88 and ’94, while total rate increased 40%. QF rates were stable in early 90’s (8.9¢), predicted to fall from 8.9¢ to 7.3¢ between 1993 and 2000 (many front-end loaded; early contracts most costly and will expire earliest) Adjusted for inflation, QF rates predicted to fall 50% between 1993 and 2000. The Real Story about Purchased Power in Maine, Alliance for a Renewable Maine Economy, March 1994:  The Real Story about Purchased Power in Maine, Alliance for a Renewable Maine Economy, March 1994 Benefits from Renewables Stabilizing impact of QFs vs the alternatives (CMP) cont. Ave NUG contracts: 8.9¢ CMP hydro <3¢ Maine Yankee, Wyman, other 80s plants: 3-9¢ 80s and cancelled plants: 18¢ Viability of Wind Power Development in Maine, MPUC, Jan. 2005 :  Viability of Wind Power Development in Maine, MPUC, Jan. 2005 Recommendations, assuming Legislature wishes to encourage Revise RPS - Separate wind tier; alternative cap mechanism; consumer payback. Would not help in obtaining financing Or: Implement SBC - Fund through competitive bid. ME facilities only. Would help obtain financing FAME financing – guarantee price; Full project financing too costly. Would help obtain financing Investigate coordinating DEP and LURC processes Public promotion of benefits of wind Viability of Wind Power Development in Maine, MPUC, Jan. 2005:  Viability of Wind Power Development in Maine, MPUC, Jan. 2005 Costs Quoted LaCapra assertions that demand from MA and CT RPSs will outstrip supply for near term. In longer term, need NY wind or offshore wind to meet demand. Thus, MA and CT RPS price impacts: 3.5¢ – 5 ¢/kWh; to continue for some time (sale of RECs) Viability of Wind Power Development in Maine, MPUC, Jan. 2005:  Viability of Wind Power Development in Maine, MPUC, Jan. 2005 Implementation Recommendations Incentive should use competitive processes to minimize cost Maine Energy Policy Overview and Opportunities for Improvement, Energy Advisors for ERC, Dec. 2003:  Maine Energy Policy Overview and Opportunities for Improvement, Energy Advisors for ERC, Dec. 2003 Recommendations Revise RPS Green standard offer Multi year standard offer SBC, tax benefits, other direct support Purchases by State Mandate disclosure of biomass CO2 neutrality Eliminate point-to-point local transmission charge Promote distributed generation Support emerging technologies, consumer awareness Have MTI manage state renewable fund Maine Energy Policy Overview and Opportunities for Improvement, Energy Advisors for ERC, Dec. 2003:  Maine Energy Policy Overview and Opportunities for Improvement, Energy Advisors for ERC, Dec. 2003 Implementation Issues – Consider: Addresses a major issued: Substantial, measurable benefit? Can win public support? Symbolic or other value? NY Study – Effects of Integrating Wind on Grid, for NY DPS, Mar. 2005:  NY Study – Effects of Integrating Wind on Grid, for NY DPS, Mar. 2005 Studied impact of increasing wind generation by 10% of NY peak load. Findings Only needed changes to existing rules are: - consider entire wind farm a contingency event; loss of all wind in state would not happen - require voltage regulation, low-voltage ride-through, monitoring, power curtailment capability Day-ahead forecasting will have slightly higher error; current processes can accommodate Current contingency approach provides adequate spinning reserve for intermittent wind Transmission not congested upstate- to downstate, so congestion not a problem Summary:  Summary Benefits from Renewables – Recurring Themes Reduced air emissions – health, environment Local economic benefits – jobs, taxes, synergies Diversity as electricity price hedge - Dampening effect on overall gas prices - Protection from fluctuating gas prices - Protection against gas supply shortage Summary:  Summary Quantified Benefits from Renewables ME policy in the 80s: GSP: $120M - $220M Reduced air emissions: $57M - $202M annually ME future RPS (IEPM estimate): Res’l bill decrease from LMP exceeds increase from price by up to $2.00 per month NY future RPS: Bill decreases in some zones: Up to 3% Two Climate Action Plan generation options have positive net $ benefit RI 20% RPS: Reduced emissions: $94M - $343M in region over 20 yrs Summary:  Summary Quantified Costs of Encouraging Renewables NY future res’l bill impacts in certain zones: 0 - 2% in 2013 NY future C/I bill impacts in certain zones: 0 - 4% in 2013 ME late-80s policy, bill impacts: 4 - 12% overall RI future RPS res’l bill impacts: 1 - 4% in 2020 MA future RPS bill impacts: 0.01¢ - 0.45¢/kWh in 2012 (probably 0-4%) ME future RPS bill impacts: 0 – 1% (@ max. $11M) Most Climate Action Plan generation options have net $ cost Summary:  Summary Some Observations: Quantification of benefits and costs relies upon assumptions of hypothetical alternatives – e.g., gas prices, capital cost of new generation, mix of fuels, renewables price premium. Thus, quantification is inherently uncertain.

Related presentations


Other presentations created by Roxie

Apricot 2004 Sinkholes
07. 10. 2007
0 views

Apricot 2004 Sinkholes

Mattel
02. 11. 2007
0 views

Mattel

Option
17. 04. 2008
0 views

Option

Value of Nonpartisan
14. 04. 2008
0 views

Value of Nonpartisan

stifelcapital
13. 04. 2008
0 views

stifelcapital

m lecture 1 2007
10. 04. 2008
0 views

m lecture 1 2007

Costa Rica
07. 04. 2008
0 views

Costa Rica

pptrick
30. 03. 2008
0 views

pptrick

060516202103
28. 03. 2008
0 views

060516202103

field to flour
04. 10. 2007
0 views

field to flour

wolff
27. 11. 2007
0 views

wolff

danielle
11. 12. 2007
0 views

danielle

WP6 CurriculumDevelopment
01. 11. 2007
0 views

WP6 CurriculumDevelopment

paris 23jan
02. 11. 2007
0 views

paris 23jan

why b entrepreneur
07. 11. 2007
0 views

why b entrepreneur

Miss Earth 2007
13. 11. 2007
0 views

Miss Earth 2007

Lecture15 Discourse
20. 08. 2007
0 views

Lecture15 Discourse

oasis case study
20. 08. 2007
0 views

oasis case study

4121
20. 08. 2007
0 views

4121

mediaplan
20. 08. 2007
0 views

mediaplan

evaluating quant research
20. 08. 2007
0 views

evaluating quant research

soren mateu kast prop13
20. 08. 2007
0 views

soren mateu kast prop13

The Given New Principle
14. 12. 2007
0 views

The Given New Principle

FadorFact
20. 08. 2007
0 views

FadorFact

Socia lContent
11. 08. 2007
0 views

Socia lContent

Staff Wellness
11. 08. 2007
0 views

Staff Wellness

SAR presentation 2005 2006
11. 08. 2007
0 views

SAR presentation 2005 2006

Typhoid 2004b
11. 08. 2007
0 views

Typhoid 2004b

Presentation Al Jisr
23. 10. 2007
0 views

Presentation Al Jisr

CL 07 lec6 2 15
15. 11. 2007
0 views

CL 07 lec6 2 15

large animal power point
03. 10. 2007
0 views

large animal power point

patents
03. 10. 2007
0 views

patents

meta analysis 09 2006
20. 08. 2007
0 views

meta analysis 09 2006

li2 2007 gender
09. 07. 2007
0 views

li2 2007 gender

Picture Chinese in Your Future
12. 10. 2007
0 views

Picture Chinese in Your Future

socratesswissranking 28 11 06
18. 10. 2007
0 views

socratesswissranking 28 11 06

Nonverbal
09. 07. 2007
0 views

Nonverbal

MJ
09. 07. 2007
0 views

MJ

Milk Fortification
09. 07. 2007
0 views

Milk Fortification

MakeUp
09. 07. 2007
0 views

MakeUp

allexp 052404
05. 10. 2007
0 views

allexp 052404

lamm1
01. 01. 2008
0 views

lamm1

schindel
11. 08. 2007
0 views

schindel

BuildingStrategyMaps v5
24. 02. 2008
0 views

BuildingStrategyMaps v5

03n 0312 ts00002 vol1
29. 02. 2008
0 views

03n 0312 ts00002 vol1

OMA TP 2003 0354
20. 08. 2007
0 views

OMA TP 2003 0354

Digital Reference Shelf
22. 11. 2007
0 views

Digital Reference Shelf

anspaugh
23. 11. 2007
0 views

anspaugh

Neolithic Europe
26. 03. 2008
0 views

Neolithic Europe

KAT PRESENTATION
21. 11. 2007
0 views

KAT PRESENTATION

Prezentacja o rekrutacji
18. 03. 2008
0 views

Prezentacja o rekrutacji

Met en zonder MakeUp Antwoord
09. 07. 2007
0 views

Met en zonder MakeUp Antwoord

media body image
09. 07. 2007
0 views

media body image

Diario Intimo de los gatos 1913
19. 06. 2007
0 views

Diario Intimo de los gatos 1913

globus
19. 06. 2007
0 views

globus

Article VIII
21. 09. 2007
0 views

Article VIII

Montreal Summer School2005
31. 12. 2007
0 views

Montreal Summer School2005

El Dulce Aroma Del Cafe 2118
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El Dulce Aroma Del Cafe 2118

El Caballo Y Cerdo 2117
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El Caballo Y Cerdo 2117

El pajaro de la paz 1853
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El pajaro de la paz 1853

El genio 2046
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El genio 2046

El buen uso de los espejos
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El buen uso de los espejos

El ladrillazo 2092
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El ladrillazo 2092

2005 JRC Workshop Smrz
06. 03. 2008
0 views

2005 JRC Workshop Smrz

El camino de las estrellas 2075
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El camino de las estrellas 2075

El sustento de la pareja 1935
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El sustento de la pareja 1935

CJ Addiction
21. 09. 2007
0 views

CJ Addiction

BLUE BEAUTY
16. 06. 2007
0 views

BLUE BEAUTY

Biler Kvinder
16. 06. 2007
0 views

Biler Kvinder

2CF Japanese Fishing Story
16. 06. 2007
0 views

2CF Japanese Fishing Story

2007 0505 Fishoree
16. 06. 2007
0 views

2007 0505 Fishoree

2006 Function Presentation
16. 06. 2007
0 views

2006 Function Presentation

El mejor doctor 2076
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El mejor doctor 2076

BWands
04. 01. 2008
0 views

BWands

El Hombre Perfecto 2059
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El Hombre Perfecto 2059

Maria project
09. 07. 2007
0 views

Maria project

13 14
14. 11. 2007
0 views

13 14

El hipopotamo y la tortuga 2119
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El hipopotamo y la tortuga 2119

Ejercicios Espirituales 2116
19. 06. 2007
0 views

Ejercicios Espirituales 2116

CSU Presentation
20. 08. 2007
0 views

CSU Presentation

Jeff
28. 12. 2007
0 views

Jeff

El Respeto 2120
19. 06. 2007
0 views

El Respeto 2120

17579
20. 08. 2007
0 views

17579

Peru Seminar
20. 08. 2007
0 views

Peru Seminar

temptations
11. 08. 2007
0 views

temptations

SAB SA CorpStdPgm05608
21. 09. 2007
0 views

SAB SA CorpStdPgm05608

Edificios colmena 1993
19. 06. 2007
0 views

Edificios colmena 1993

eval
20. 08. 2007
0 views

eval

Takahiro Sato
29. 11. 2007
0 views

Takahiro Sato

tfpresent
11. 08. 2007
0 views

tfpresent

LMK preze
09. 07. 2007
0 views

LMK preze

pods03
29. 10. 2007
0 views

pods03

Social Engineering ISACA RIFE v5
20. 08. 2007
0 views

Social Engineering ISACA RIFE v5

Volkow505
20. 08. 2007
0 views

Volkow505

Towards Extracting Personality 4
11. 08. 2007
0 views

Towards Extracting Personality 4

Dios y el Zodiaco 1737
19. 06. 2007
0 views

Dios y el Zodiaco 1737

sanford poster
11. 08. 2007
0 views

sanford poster