The “energy revolution” that has produced no gas

The licensing of thousands of square miles of English countryside for fracking five years ago has resulted in no wells and no oil or gas.

14th round licences offered in central and northern England. Source: Oil & Gas Authority

Areas from the Isle of Wight and Dorset to the North York Moors were allocated to exploration companies in what was described at the time as the “start of a shale gas revolution”.

By today, under the terms of the new licences, the operators should have drilled nearly 100 wells and fracked more than 10% of them.

But analysis by DrillOrDrop shows that in the past five years nearly 20 licences have been abandoned and no shale gas sites have been developed. No wells have been drilled and no fracking has been carried out in these licence areas.

The licences were awarded under the 14th round, a competitive process organised by the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition.

Launching the bidding in 2014, the then energy secretary Matt Hancock said:

“Unlocking shale gas in Britain has the potential to provide us with greater energy security, jobs and growth”.

The 30-year licences started on 21 July 2016 and were due to last until 2046, four years short of the UK target for net zero carbon emissions.

Each licence, know as a PEDL (petroleum exploration and development licence) was divided into three phases:

  • initial term: drilling, testing and fracking
  • second term: appraisal and development
  • third term: production

The initial term of the 14th round licences was due to last five years and end today (20 July 2021).

The successful companies committed during the initial term to carry out 2d and 3d seismic testing, drill a total of 96 wells and frack 12 of them.

But to date only two planning permissions for any type of oil and gas well have been granted in 14th round licence areas.

Both these consents were issued to Ineos Upstream Limited, a subsidiary of Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s giant petrochemical empire. Both applications had been refused by the mineral planning authority and were decided after public inquiries.

One of these consents, at Harthill in south Yorkshire (PEDL304), expired last month with no physical work on the site, apart from the installation of bird scarers and some archaeological excavation.

Another, in PEDL300 at Marsh Lane, in Derbyshire, is expected to expire in mid-August. No work has been carried out on this site either.

Three other planning applications in 14th round licences are waiting for a decision. These are:

  • Woodsetts in south Yorkshire, in PEDL304 – decision awaited by the local government secretary after an appeal by Ineos against refusal for shale gas exploration
  • Arreton on the Isle of Wight, in PEDL331 – decision awaited on an application by UK Oil & Gas plc application for conventional oil exploration
  • Athelhampton Road, Puddletown, Dorset in PEDL327 – extra information requested by Dorset County Council for an application for oil exploration by South Western Energy Limited

One more potential site has been identified for conventional oil at Godshill on the Isle of Wight. But the operator, UK Oil & Gas plc has not submitted any applications.

Seismic testing, which does not need planning permission, has been carried out by Ineos in 14th round areas of Derbyshire, south Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire.

But DrillOrDrop is not aware of seismic testing in 14th round licences held by some of the other operators, which include Cuadrilla, IGas, Aurora Energy Resources Limited and Egdon Resources UK Limited.


A PEDL licence would normally be expected to lapse if the operator did not meet its work commitments.

But DrillOrDrop analysis of data from the regulator, the Oil & Gas Authority (OGA), shows that 60 14th round licences will continue with an extended initial term despite not meeting their original commitments.

For 41 licences, the initial term now ends on 20 July 2024. Another 18 licences will end their initial term a year earlier on 20 July 2023 and one ends on 20 November 2021. (See the end of this post for the specific PEDLs).

Many of these extensions have been made in the past year. A freedom of information request by DrillOrDrop in 2020 revealed that 14 PEDLs had their initial term extended to 2023 and another eight to 2024.

The OGA confirmed that since the start of the pandemic, it had not granted any onshore licence extensions solely on the basis of COVID-19.

The most likely reason is the government moratorium on fracking in England. This was imposed in November 2019 after fracking by Cuadrilla at Preston New Road near Blackpool induced small earthquakes that were felt across the region.

Three quarters of the 14th round PEDLs (46) were described by the OGA as shale gas licences.

They would be at least indirectly affected by the moratorium.

The onshore industry lobbied for the moratorium to be lifted but it remains in force.

Last week the energy minister, Lord Goldsmith, said the government had no plans to review it or support shale gas exploration unless and until science demonstrated categorically that fracking could be done safely for both people and the environment.

There is evidence that operators have sought extensions because of the moratorium.

In December 2019, the FT revealed that Cuadrilla had asked the OGA to extend the terms of its fracking licences in England by “whatever time period the recently announced moratorium lasts”.

This might help to explain why the OGA extended the initial term of some shale gas licences. But only nine existing 14th round PEDLs had a commitment in their work programme to frack a horizontal well. That leaves 37 licences with no initial term requirement to frack.

There are also question marks about why there should be extensions to some other licences.

South Western Energy’s PEDL327 is listed by the OGA as targeting shale gas but the proposed site at Puddletown is for conventional oil. Four PEDLs listed as targeting mine gas have had extensions until 2023 and two to 2024.

Talking about a revolution

Not surprisingly, the onshore oil and gas industry warmly welcomed the award of the 14th round licences in 2015.

At that time, the industry body, UK Onshore Oil and Gas (UKOOG) described the award of licences as “a vital day for the future of energy in the UK”. It said there was an opportunity to create “tens of thousands of jobs, reduce imports, generate significant tax revenue and support British manufacturing from an extremely small footprint which will benefit the environment at the same time”.

Ineos, the biggest winner in the 14th round, said:

“This is the start of a Shale gas revolution that will transform manufacturing in the UK. INEOS has the skills to safely extract the gas and we have already committed to both fully consult and to share the rewards with the local communities.

Its commercial director at the time, Patrick Erwin, said:

“If the planning system works as well as we hope, we should have meaningful production of shale gas in the UK by the end of the decade”.

IGas said:

“This is a critical time for the future of Britain’s energy mix as gas, of which 50% of our consumption is currently imported, is central to our energy security as we transition to a lower carbon environment.”

Back in 2015, many environmental organisations feared the 14th round had fired the starting gun for fracking across England.

Greenpeace said:

“This announcement means that vast swathes of British countryside have been opened up to fracking. And now that fracking under National Parks and other protected areas has been pushed through – it seems that nowhere is sacred.”

Frack Free North Yorkshire described the scale of planned operations as “staggering”:

“If these plans are allowed to go ahead, Yorkshire will soon become one huge gas field, with grave consequences for our local industries, environment, wildlife, health and peaceful way of life.”

Frack Free Ryedale said:

“If local people haven’t been worried about fracking up to now because it’s not happening on their doorstep, then it is time for them to wake up and smell the methane. Fracking is now on everyone’s doorstep.”

In 2021, the industry continues to maintain that it will prove that fracking can be done safely and the moratorium will be lifted.

Many opponents argue that the fracking revolution had been killed by earthquakes, public opposition and UK climate change commitments.

DrillOrDrop will continue to follow the fortunes of the 14th round licences in their extended initial terms.

Extension details

Categories: Regulation, slider

Tagged as: , , , ,

73 replies »

  1. Thank goodness for the moratorium and the failure of fracking in the U.K.
    Delighted the government has no plans to support shale.
    I appreciate others disagree but this was never an appropriate industry for a small and densely populated country like the U.K. Not to mention the oft discussed issues of climate change and the UK’s sometimes complex geology.
    The countryside looked beautiful today in the sunshine and I feel immense relief that fracking never took off, for the sake of the climate and our country.

  2. Notwithstanding the recent terrifying evidence of accelerating climate change, many pro-frackers continue to demonstrate how deeply deluded they are to believe that this toxic industry, which releases methane and induces earthquakes (reportedly damaging up to 200 Fylde homes in 2019) could now ever be acceptable.
    This failed experiment has already cost the UK tax-payer many millions of pounds.
    Cuadrilla must immediately dismantle its site at Little Plumpton, Lancashire and return it to safe agricultural land.
    The fantasy of fracking is over.

    • Agreed Dr Francis Rugman. There is enough evidence now of real and accelerating and unprecedented climate deterioration across the world.
      Natural cycles of weather changes take tens of thousands, if not millions of years to run their course. However these catastrophic weather fluctuations have happened, in Earth history time scale terms, practically overnight. That alone in Earths historical context is literally unprecedented except perhaps from asteroid impact events.

      The extinctions of the past are being revisited upon us. But not from natural fluctuations in solar or planetary convulsions, but by our own trust that power and profit and greed motivated destruction of the Earths natural ecosystems will provide answers for a better world. Whereas all these processes appear to have done is to create more and more problems and to disrupt and decimate the Earths naturally balanced ecosystems as can clearly be seen all around us now.

      There is only one explanation for the rapid and accelerating deterioration in the Earths weather and geological systems that had previously reached an ecological balance and relative stability.

      And that is the profit motivated and insanely ideological practice of interfering with the natural balances of the world delicate ecosystems out of clearly expressed greed and contempt for anything but fossil fuel profit at any, or all costs.

      Further destruction of delicate ecosystems were warned about by the oil and gas monopolistic agencies themselves, and was quietly buried under profit and power oriented expediency.
      Their own predictions are very obviously manifesting everywhere on Earth.

      It must be apparent even to those who will fully follow the fossil fuel dogma, that it is patently time to stop this wasteful extravagance of this planets dwindling resources and to concentrate on methods that will lead the planet out of the trap that has been set by power profit and greed.

      As a species, amongst all the other species on this planet, if survival in an ecological support cradle as provided by Earths natural balances, is even remotely possible, then exploration and extraction of oil and gas must be curtailed as a matter of urgency. In its place, to concentrate and to institute the only viable alternatives that are being developed and will be developed. For common sense to prevail, its clear that the human race needs to replace the entirely self serving power profit and greed monopoly from taking everything, and everyone down with it.

      This present time, may be the last chance the human race will get before the disasters so clearly presented all around us, overwhelm our ability to revert back to to living in harmony with the planets ecosystems.

  3. Amen to that. It is difficult, having listened carefully to John Kerry over the last 24hrs. to understand how the deniers still have a leg to stand on. The explanation of course is the determination of the frackers. A very readable and totally persuasive account of the tactics used by such opponents of our efforts to prevent the exploitation of new sources of fossil fuels is to be found in Michael Mann’s most recent work ‘The New Climate War’ (2021). Like Kerry, he leaves his readers in no doubt that action to mitigate climate change and defeat deniers is an urgent necessity. A powerful hope in our ‘agency’ (his word) in this respect shines through the work

    • [Edited by moderator]

      There was no real progress to shift the opinion of those who were not anti fracking in the tracker survey, and one can understand why.

      However, with respect to a fracking moratorium in UK, not too unhappy about that. It would appear there are many willing, and able, to frack away and supply UK needs by exporting, and just frack away some more if demand requires it. Those who pay the resulting lost tax revenue may be a little more unhappy, as tax increases are already on the way. Sorry, younger generation, you pay for what you are suggested to want.

      If things get really desperate, the gas isn’t going anywhere.

      There is indeed only one explanation. There are too many people on this planet, and until that is addressed everything else is small fry. However, each and everyone on the planet could do a lot by simply taking responsibility for reducing their carbon footprint by purchasing locally, and reducing their use of energy, even though there will be billions more who gain disposable income and want to dispose of it by doing the sort of things those who have had disposable income have been doing, ie. not purchasing locally and being careless with the use of energy. (How many boil water once a day, plonk in a flask, and dispense during the day for their coffee/tea? Not many.) Perhaps a lot more if and when fuel duty is transferred to electricity. Because, it will be transferred, which means it will not be in one place, but in another, 1720.

  4. Fracking as it is defined here, did not take place thanks to the many hundreds of people who were prepared to climb on lorries, to block site entrances and to do all they could to make fracking difficult for the likes of Caudrilla and Ineos. Praise also for the likes of Drill or Drop and the late Ian Crane for keeping us informed.

    • Fracking did take place but was stopped by seismic events, thus introducing the moratorium and therefore making shale uneconomic. All protestors did was delay the outcome which would have happened earlier without them.

      • Exactly, Paul.

        Thanks for the reminder of what actually happened. I find it interesting that memories are supposed to be so short.

        As for John Kerry, perhaps he will have freedom to fly around the world, and if you are a billionaire, they can have the freedom to fire their rockets into space for tourism, whilst the rest of the world will do as they are told. Nope. I have sat and discussed the future with three generations in the Far East, and the younger generation especially, have very different ideas. Post Covid, many will be back on London streets shopping away. And, they will do it more often if UK is generous in importing produce from them, when it could be produced locally, giving them the disposable income to do so. I suppose the solution might be to produce more stuff in the UK that they could take back with them?

      • Sorry Paul in my opinion you are incorrect.
        Were it not for the worldwide media coverage of anti-fracking activists and their demonstrations plus hundreds of thousands of emails and letters plus high profile legal actions exposing the fracking industry’s untruths, the swarms of Hydrofrac Earthquakes that rattled across the Fylde would have been explained away by the industry and their government facilitators once again.

      • UK start up research and development shale gas companies…………Pummelled by well organised communities.

        • Lest we forget. Cuadrilla with all their supposed experience decided not to carry out a 3D survey before their first UK fracking attempt. They wanted to prove the viability of a UK shale gas industry and yet chose not to use the most useful tool readily available. It was all down hill from there.

  5. It certainly doesn’t look like very much natural gas (or oil) will be produced onshore UK, and no “fracking”. Not the case offshore of course, although there will not be any shale production offshore. But what is actually happening globally? Developing middle classes in the Far East / India etc. with surplus income wanting to improve their standards of living and buy “stuff” that we have. I also listened to John Kerry this morning but I fail to see how COP 26 will produce a plan which will be adhered to. The forecasts don’t look great. The UK can go to zero emissions tomorrow but it will hardly dent the global situation.

    “Global energy demand is set to increase by 4.6% in 2021, more than offsetting the 4% contraction in 2020 and pushing demand 0.5% above 2019 levels. Almost 70% of the projected increase in global energy demand is in emerging markets and developing economies, where demand is set to rise to 3.4% above 2019 levels. Energy use in advanced economies is on course to be 3% below pre-Covid levels.

    Demand for all fossil fuels is set to grow significantly in 2021. Coal demand alone is projected to increase by 60% more than all renewables combined, underpinning a rise in emissions of almost 5%, or 1 500 Mt. This expected increase would reverse 80% of the drop in 2020, with emissions ending up just 1.2% (or 400 Mt) below 2019 emissions levels.

    Coal demand is on course to rise 4.5% in 2021, with more than 80% of the growth concentrated in Asia. China alone is projected to account for over 50% of global growth. Coal demand in the United States and the European Union is also rebounding, but is still set to remain well below pre-crisis levels. The power sector accounted for only 50% of the drop in coal-related emissions in 2020. But the rapid increase in coal-fired generation in Asia means the power sector is expected to account for 80% of the rebound in 2021.

    Natural gas demand is set to grow by 3.2% in 2021, propelled by increasing demand in Asia, the Middle East and the Russian Federation (“Russia”). This is expected to put global demand more than 1% above 2019 levels. In the United States – the world’s largest natural gas market – the annual increase in demand is set to amount to less than 20% of the 20 bcm decline in 2020, squeezed by the continued growth of renewables and rising natural gas prices. Nearly three-quarters of the global demand growth in 2021 is from the industry and buildings sectors, while electricity generation from natural gas remains below 2019 levels.

    Electricity demand is due to increase by 4.5% in 2021, or over 1 000 TWh. This is almost five times greater than the decline in 2020, cementing electricity’s share in final energy demand above 20%. Almost 80% of the projected increase in demand in 2021 is in emerging market and developing economies, with the People’s Republic China (“China”) alone accounting for half of global growth. Demand in advanced economies remains below 2019 levels.”

  6. I’m not sure it’s true, Paul, that protesters succeeded only in delaying an inevitable outcome. Your ‘inevitable outcome’ might have had to await various fracking attempts and concomitant pollution, social disruption, etc. That, the protesters mostly stopped. It’s difficult to prove either way, but Cuadrilla in Lancashire and Third Energy in Yorkshire, others too, did seem eventually and with ill grace to respond directly to protest. In North Yorkshire it looks even possible that conversion has taken place. We will see.

    The need for individual action to combat climate change is, I believe, unarguable, but this must not be allowed to divert attention from the primary need for the state to act. (There is an interesting parallel here with the pandemic, – has the state the right to shift the responsibility for the health of its citizens on to the awareness and conscience, not to mention morality of the individual?). It’s not of course just the state but all states, corporations and international organizations, philanthropic and otherwise, which must act globally, in concert.( Kerry’s mission seems directed to this end.) It will be hard, it will be expensive, but it will be much harder and more expensive if this does not happen. Difficulty, even extreme difficulty, is no excuse not to try.

    Your second posting, Paul, refreshingly informed as it is, does well to raise awareness of the extent of the problem as supply is ramped up to meet projected demand. I should love to hear Kerry respond to this.

    My own feeling is that this second posting is too doom-laden and as such will inhibit and delay the public demand that renewables be immediately ramped up. This must happen, possibly, even probably at the expense of projected demand, and on a global level whilst working hard to shield those most vulnerable. Kerry, I think, is working in this direction: (would that we had politicians of this calibre.) You implicitly deny that renewables will ever be in a position to replace fossil fuels, a message no doubt welcomed by the industry but inevitably to be mourned by the planet. I don’t think you intend this.

    Kerry was persuasive last night, and again this morning, in his belief that the balance in the US has shifted, and that even the relevant industry would not be in a position at the end of Biden’s term to reverse all that is now in place, within the industry and without, to adapt to the transition to renewables. He was convinced that the demand you helpfully highlight can be met, and more than met. Industry, he insisted, stands to achieve with adaptation to renewables those profit goals which power its existence. In other words for him, and for those of us who persist in hope, there is no going back.

    • Well as there was only one site that fracked, PNR, and the one that caused seismic events, can’t see what the others who didn’t frack had anything to do with it.

      It was very obvious that only one site would be allowed to frack, and that is what happened. That could have all been done very quickly but was delayed, so, Paul is quite correct. The situation that arose would have arisen earlier without delays caused by the protestors, so, unless they caused the seismic events-in which case, the moratorium should be lifted-then, what is recorded is as Paul stated, even though some would still like to change history.

      And for anyone to believe USA will accept a major increase to transport costs will soon be out of power to force it. WW2 showed that US public, even under such circumstances, will not agree to that. And, they still live in a democracy, so they will decide knowing they can indeed go back every 2 years-or less than a year now- or 4 years at a push. Especially, if during that time their jobs are being off shored to areas with lower energy costs. American citizens love cheap energy, they can maintain it if they desire to do so. Time will tell how far that issue clashes with Kerry, but I suspect it will. Transition in USA may look to be racing away if the focus is upon individual projects, but as a whole, USA has a big issue with energy provision that will take an awfully long time to correct, let alone change it.

  7. It’s not for me to respond for Paul, Martin, but I doubt that he is saying that the seismic events registered were inevitable. I don’t think Cuadrilla thought they were.

    • I think we are all in agreement, that the seismic events were not inevitable. But, they were at PNR under the traffic light system, but that is what testing is about. I believe it was the antis who were talking about industrialization whilst the reality was one site testing and a few others waiting to do the same, reined back not by protest but by authority to proceed.

      So, quite simply the light would have gone red earlier at PNR without the delays. Would it have gone red elsewhere? Who knows, without further testing. Some will say they do know, but they don’t.

      I can not accept Peter’s point. The traffic light system was pretty straight forward and would have recorded, with or without protest. Just sooner.

      • Please enlighten us:
        Was there any published peer-reviewed, robust evidence base to demonstrate that the so-called ‘Traffic-light system’ had ever worked to prevent fracking induced earthquakes elsewhere ?
        Or had these parameters and ‘protocol’ merely been plucked out of thin air in order to placate the public ?

  8. First shale well fracked was Cuadrilla’s Preese Hall. Next ready was Third Energy at KM. The Government / OGA held off giving the required permit to TE until Cuadrilla had fracked at PNR and tested the seismic traffic light system – which worked and fracking was suspended after two wells went red during fracking. Shale fracking onshore UK was suspended while a review was undertaken; then the moratorium was brought in. The big question is whether or not the geology at KM (and Igas and INEOS) locations would also have resulted in similar red light seismicity during hydraulic fracturing. We will probably never know although it is odd that IGas are seeking a 3 year extension, supported by the planning officer, at Misson.

    Probably inevitable in hindsight Iaith1720.

    • Strange, I was under the impression that Third Energy didn’t get final permission to frack because the required due diligence around their finances had not been done and there were serious questions to be answered, based on their accounts, which for several years didn’t appear until well beyond the final date for submission. They were all set up and ready to go well before the PNR seismic debacle.

  9. Thanks to all the hard working activists who made this happen.

    You know who you are, you lovely people. 💚 ✊

    • Paul, you state: ” the seismic traffic light system – which worked …”
      Please tell that to the reported 200 people with damage to homes ?

      • Dr Frank – please provide evidence of the 200 people with damage to homes? Are these 200 homes or 200 people in x homes? The system worked, the operations were shut down. Post operation investigation resulted in a moratorium on shale fracking in the UK.

        Out of interest how is it going with the frack sand on the PNR location? I recall you and others were trying to make a medical case to have it removed with the HSE? Has it gone now?

        • Paul,
          Cuadrilla’s 2.9 ML fracking induced earthquake at PNR in August 2019 was felt by thousands on the Fylde and hundreds reported damage to homes.
          Drill or Drop: ”The British Geological Survey said this tremor was felt by several thousand people, while several hundred reported damage to homes.”

          The traffic light system was supposed to prevent significant induced earthquakes before any damage to homes.
          Your problem is that now both HM Government and the general public no longer believes that this traffic light system works.
          Fracking here is over.

          • Yes shale fracking is over in UK (have I said otherwise?). So no evidence (peer reviewed or substantiated as is normally your wish) of 200 people with damage to homes? One or two perhaps? Plenty of naturally occurring earthquakes are felt by thousands of people.

            And the frack sand? Is the issue closed now?

            • Paul: You may wish to pursue your quest with the BGS (if they will release their own published figures).
              Drill or Drop stated that according to BGS ”several hundred reported damage to homes.”
              There were certainly many more more than your failed attempt to minimize as ‘one or two’ cases of structural damage to homes from Cuadrilla’s fracking induced earthquake.
              How many homes would you permit to be damaged by fracking if it was in your own area ?
              Do not underestimate the human impact.
              The government knows that the traffic light system did not prevent fracking induced earthquakes from damaging homes.



                According to Drill or Drop the British Geological Survey received 197 reports of damage from the 2.9ML earthquake at Preston New Road. How many substantiated?

                According to Cuadrilla possible damage was in the low two figures.

                What is the actual number that suffered structural damage? No one seems to know which implies it was very low.

                And the question about the frack sand at PNR is genuine – what did the HSE do, and is it sill there? I assume others are also interested in this issue which you raised previously.

                • Paul,
                  1. You state ”the British Geological Survey received 197 reports of damage from the 2.9ML earthquake at Preston New Road”
                  Not as you previously stated, ”one or two” then ?
                  But I must humbly apologise to you for my gross error, when I stated ‘200’ reports of damage.
                  Yes, please do pursue your quest to determine how many were legally substantiated.
                  Are you seriously saying that you are not aware of the non-disclosure clauses which may have to be signed in such circumstances to obtain compensation ?
                  Good luck with your research !

                  2 .You also ask me about fine silica sand
                  Yes, I was very pleased when MPs followed up on our local concerns about the questionable management of sand by Cuadrilla.
                  Drill or Drop: ”HSE responds to MPs on silica dust at fracking site: HSE did NOT inspect the management of sand at PNR:

                  The so called ‘gold-standard’ safe-guarding system (advertised by pro-frackers) has not done do so terribly well again ?

                  3.You have yet to answer my question to you:
                  How many homes would you permit to be damaged by fracking if it was in your own area ?

                  Good luck with your work, but I now have better things to do.

                • The question is how many properties were actually damaged and verified (not reported, many of which will not have been caused by the fracture stimulation). But you know this, and it would appear you also don’t know the answer. End of discussion.

                  Frack sand – I am trying to find out if the frack sand is still on location? I assume the answer to this must be yes based on your reply which adds nothing new to this issue. I would go and check myself but it would appear it is too dangerous – I live locally by the way.

                  How many homes would you permit to be damaged by fracking if it was in your own area ? Odd question – the issue is the traffic light system, it was used, fracking stopped, shale exploitation ended by a moratorium after investigation. Some houses apparently damaged. No one hurt. Compensation paid. As I said before, without testing a concept / process the world would stand still. Being a scientist you should understand that?

                  No work to go back to, retired.

                • So, the 200ish were reported, and no idea of how many were valid.

                  [Edited by moderator – no evidence I know of concerning fake claims.]

Add a comment

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.