Join 3,516 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Peak Travel
January 8, 2011 11:45 AM   Subscribe

Have we hit 'peak travel'? Recent studies have suggested we may be approaching the limits of global capacity to sustain growth in human movement at current rates, or that we may already be at the structural limits of that capacity: the theory of "peak travel." Does it matter? What is our responsibility as travelers? Is there an upside?

The study generating a lot of the buzz is entitled "Are We Reaching Peak Travel? Trends in Passenger Transport in Eight Industrialized Countries," by Stanford researchers Adam Millard-Ball and Lee Schipper, and appears in the November 2010 issue of the academic journal Transport Reviews. It is behind a paywall, but the abstract is here.

Via Resilience Science, here is a key quote from the article:
As with total travel activity, the recent decline in car and light truck use is difficult to attribute solely to higher fuel prices, as it is far in excess of what recent estimates of fuel price elasticities would suggest. For example, Hughes et al. (2006) estimate the short-run fuel price elasticity in the U.S. to range from -0.034 to -0.077, which corresponds to a reduction in fuel consumption by just over 1% in response to the 15% increase in gasoline prices between 2007 and 2008. In reality, per capita energy use for light-duty vehicles fell by 4.3% over this period.

…[in these countries transportation sector] the major factor behind increasing energy use and CO2 emissions since the 1970s – activity – has ceased its rise, at least for the time being. Should this plateau continue, it is possible that accelerated decline in the energy intensity of car travel, some shifts back to rail and bus modes, and at least somewhat less carbon per unit of energy might leave absolute levels of emissions in 2020 or 2030 lower than today.
Further interesting insights from John Herman at SmartPlanet.
posted by spitbull (49 comments total) 16 users marked this as a favorite

 
They have obviously never driven I75.
posted by TwelveTwo at 12:00 PM on January 8, 2011 [2 favorites]


In the annals of human hypocrisy, there is no more egregious entry than that of the environmental activist jetting from conference to conference around the world. People who shink in horrified contempt from the sight of a Hummer on the street think nothing of climbing on board one of these monster Hummers-of-the-air, these flying exhaust pipes, these fossil-fuel-devouring flesh tanks.

The author of the fifth link above confesses to be among these merry Elmer Gantrys of ecology, saying of such conferences, "They're about sustainability, so it's better that I be there, right?" before admitting to some recent second thoughts about the wisdom of pouring tons of poisonous gases into the upper atmosphere to haul her precious little bottom around the world.

I suspect that one of the reasons that people who are delayed on or off the tarmac during these blizzards, grow so furious, is because in their hearts, they know they are traveling for a frivolous purpose, and their anger is a combination of guilt and anger at themselves for risking so much discomfort for such trivial purposes.

One the things I like least about having become upper middle class, is the extent to which travel talk is the common conversational coin among my peers. It takes barely two or three sentences before the talk turns to travel, and where you just were and where you're planning to go. Yet in all this travel talk, almost no one makes an interesting observation about where they've been, no one has an anecdote that brings the place to life, or enlarges my knowledge or understanding of these locales. Not even under my close questioning. It's all about signaling and naming place names. (The best you are likely to get is complaints about food or service or lodging - usually about the best not being nearly as best as advertised.) The children of privilege who travel hippie style around the world, rarely have anything interesting to say, either.

This is such a constant observation, that I now suspect that it's the shallowest people who travel the most. They like the constant sense of busyness and self-importance that surrounds travel, the need to make reservations, meet timetables, pack and bustle. Which would all be very well, if we didn't have an environment to worry about.
posted by Faze at 12:42 PM on January 8, 2011 [33 favorites]


This is stunningly stupid stuff.
posted by parmanparman at 12:57 PM on January 8, 2011


"Peak X" seems to have become a meme. We're also approaching "Peak Chocolate", I've been told.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 1:10 PM on January 8, 2011


I think I meet the same people as Faze - you can't possibly be a real person and really understand the world unless you've gone and patronised some people in a country less economically developed than your own. While not giving a toss about poor people ten minute's walk from your house.
posted by Coobeastie at 1:14 PM on January 8, 2011 [2 favorites]


(The best you are likely to get is complaints about food or service or lodging - usually about the best not being nearly as best as advertised.)

I'd suggest that the problem is with the people you hang out with, not their income level.
posted by blue_beetle at 1:14 PM on January 8, 2011 [14 favorites]


Let's all take a rowboat across the ocean! Fun galore!
posted by glip at 1:25 PM on January 8, 2011 [1 favorite]


"Peak travel" is a bit of a dishonest way to frame it. I skimmed the paper, the actual claim is this: passenger travel intensity is no longer growing in 8 industrialized countries.

"Intensity" means "per GDP". It's an Environmental Kuznets Curve paper. The theory goes that as countries get richer, their physical demands on the environment saturate, and then eventually decline. This is a controversial theory to say the least and there is a long debate about it. It certainly does seem plausible that travel has some saturation point; at an individual level, you can only travel so much before you have done all the travelling you feel like doing. The claim is that richer countries are saturating somewhat, i.e. that intensity is "plateauing" or "flattening".

Note that even if intensity is flat, total vehicle miles will grow at the same rate as population. The paper is not claiming that total travel is reaching some peak; only that it no longer grows directly with GDP. Note further that this paper does not consider lower-income countries, which in all likelihood have a lot of explosive travel demand growth coming up as their populations get richer. It also ignores freight transport, which is also growing very fast, especially air and trucking to support time-sensitive e-commerce shipments; in fact some people think freight is simply displacing personal travel to some degree.

And finally, note that this paper suffers from one of the major problems with EKC studies, the so called 'biocular excitement test' (source*) - a curve "looks like" it's flattening out. There are "signs of levelling out" and "signs of saturation" in the curves provided. But to me, they look like most of them are still growing, albeit at a somewhat slower rate than in the past. You can only identify a peak if it has come and gone. Slow growth might mean we are approaching a peak; or it might mean we are approaching a period of sustained slow growth. I don't agree that their own data supports the conclusions they've drawn. It is suggestive -- in fact the authors say that themselves in the paper, "the evidence presented here is suggestive rather than conclusive" -- but I could use the same data to "suggest" a completely different story. It would be great if travel demand were indeed leveling out, but don't count on it.

* "The analysis of time-series data must move beyond the visual inspection mode. By itself, the “biocular excitement test” cannot properly discriminate among competing hypotheses about the trend in an indicator or about the driving forces underlying the trend. Regression analysis must use standard techniques for testing the significance of model specification and results and for establishing the structure of the underlying data-generating process."
posted by PercussivePaul at 1:33 PM on January 8, 2011 [12 favorites]


It seems likely that our need to travel has shrunk substantially. Computing, telecommunications and the Internet have eliminated many of the tasks that historically required travel and made those that still do much more efficient.

Examples: I'm sure you can think of many more.
posted by justkevin at 1:57 PM on January 8, 2011


In the annals of human hypocrisy, there is no more egregious entry than that of the environmental activist jetting from conference to conference around the world. People who shink in horrified contempt from the sight of a Hummer on the street think nothing of climbing on board one of these monster Hummers-of-the-air, these flying exhaust pipes, these fossil-fuel-devouring flesh tanks.

On my list of sins against human decency, cynicism ranks a lot higher (i.e., worse) than hypocrisy.
posted by outlandishmarxist at 2:17 PM on January 8, 2011 [12 favorites]


I suspect that one of the reasons that people who are delayed on or off the tarmac during these blizzards, grow so furious, is because in their hearts, they know they are traveling for a frivolous purpose, and their anger is a combination of guilt and anger at themselves for risking so much discomfort for such trivial purposes.

My guess is that between being stranded at an airport for hours or days, lacking communication from the airlines, having to spend vacation time at an airport, losing flights, not knowing when you'll manage to see friends and family and lastly, possibly eating the Christmas meal at an airport, your explanation for the anger of stranded passengers must rank pretty low. Like it or not, the world is more interconnected nowadays.

There's that Proust quote "the real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes" (a paraphrase of Rousseau iirc) that supports the notion that people who travel might not be always getting a lot out of it. However, many people do. A friend gave a short presentation of his experiences in Barcelona and almost all students who attended it applied to go there for Erasmus. People live in different places, meet people with different backgrounds and even write a book or two. All travel isn't characterised by your opinion of your acquaintances' travels and pretending travel does not increase our knowledge or isn't interesting does not aid an honest discussion that is a prerequisite of taking measures for the environment.
posted by ersatz at 2:32 PM on January 8, 2011 [5 favorites]


In the annals of human hypocrisy, there is no more egregious entry than that of the environmental activist jetting from conference to conference around the world. People who shink in horrified contempt from the sight of a Hummer on the street think nothing of climbing on board one of these monster Hummers-of-the-air, these flying exhaust pipes, these fossil-fuel-devouring flesh tanks.

Well, first off, air travel, on a per mile basis, uses less fuel and creates less emissions than a passenger vehicle (wikipedia link, but is consistent with a number of peer reviewed studies and analyses I reviewed recently). Its not rail, but flying in a jet is closer to being a Prius-of-the-air, not a Hummer.


But more fundamentally, I've always been rather unimpressed by the intellectual laziness and disingenousness of this critique. To take this seriously, you're basically insisting that for someone to spend any time critiquing the currently problematic practices in our society, else risk being labeled a hypocrite, when perhaps the most troubling fact of the energy and pollution intensive practices of modern life is that there aren't easy alternatives. You want to be effective in the world today? You need a computer, you need to travel. What's wrong with pointing out that there are big, big problems with the current set-up, even as you are more or less compelled to participate? I'll be the first to admit that we're all to some extent complicit and compromised, but lets not insist that this requires us to say nothing or do nothing about it. Or worse, that this should compel us to just stop caring or paying attention.

Regardless: "No more egregious entry"? Laughable hyberbole.
posted by bumpkin at 2:47 PM on January 8, 2011 [18 favorites]


Let's all take a rowboat across the ocean! Fun galore!

Peak rowboat is so 2009.
posted by !Jim at 2:57 PM on January 8, 2011


I suspect that one of the reasons that people who are delayed on or off the tarmac during these blizzards, grow so furious, is because in their hearts, they know they are traveling for a frivolous purpose, and their anger is a combination of guilt and anger at themselves for risking so much discomfort for such trivial purposes.
Christ what an ...

others have called you on this already, so I won't necessarily point out how trollish you sound. I was stranded in the winter blizzard because I was flying home after spending Christmas with my parents. I'm sorry if I didn't work in a soup kitchen while I was visiting them, but you likely would've pissed on that anyway.

Back on topic: I was wondering what the future holds for air travel if oil does grow scarce. It seems like every year there are more fare hikes and more rounds of cost-cutting and deprivation in the airlines, all chalked up to rising fuel prices. While electric cars or hydrogen fuelled ground transportation seem to be just around the futuristic corner, it feels like jets are lagging in that regard. What would expect to see in twenty or fifty years? Airships? Trans-oceanic high speed rail?
posted by bl1nk at 3:18 PM on January 8, 2011 [2 favorites]


Schafer has done work examining how humans have somewhat consistent patterns of travel behavior, irrespective of the wealth level in a paper titled “Long-Term Trends in Global Passenger Mobility”. It's very interesting, as it suggests human have a similar time-budget for traveling, irrespective of the mode.

I only skimmed the paper, but it really does not look much like a plateau (or peak).

As an aside, I have quite a strong dislike when graphs are made using the default settings in excel. This is not to diminish the work (it could be very good); it's just a little unsettling.
posted by a womble is an active kind of sloth at 3:27 PM on January 8, 2011


Oh god! He's right! I just tried to get up and walk across the room, and I can't move! We've exhausted our reserves of travel!

Oh wait, it's just my leg fell asleep. False alarm, people.
posted by Salvor Hardin at 3:31 PM on January 8, 2011 [4 favorites]


I haven't RTFA, so that's not supposed to be an insight into anything. I just thought the title was funny. I'll let myself out.
posted by Salvor Hardin at 3:31 PM on January 8, 2011


Have we hit peak have we hit peak Have we hit peak Have we hit peak Have we hit peak Have we hit peak Have we hit peak ??
posted by zippy at 3:39 PM on January 8, 2011 [7 favorites]


Womble - I'm sure I've read the same about commutes, that while we have moved further away from our places of work our commute time has remained stable since the industrial revolution.

There's that Proust quote "the real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes"

Thank you ersatz, that will replace my current and much less elegant "if you leave the country a tosser, you're likely to come back a tosser".
posted by Coobeastie at 3:39 PM on January 8, 2011


If a country is governed wisely,
its inhabitants will be content.
They enjoy the labor of their hands
and don't waste time inventing
labor-saving machines.
Since they dearly love their homes,
they aren't interested in travel.
There may be a few wagons and boats,
but these don't go anywhere.
There may be an arsenal of weapons,
but nobody ever uses them.
People enjoy their food,
take pleasure in being with their families,
spend weekends working in their gardens,
delight in the doings of the neighborhood.
And even though the next country is so close
that people can hear its roosters crowing and its dogs barking,
they are content to die of old age
without ever having gone to see it.
-Tao Te Ching
posted by melissam at 3:49 PM on January 8, 2011 [9 favorites]


I always wondered if one day future historians would look back at the demise of the Concorde and see that it represented the end of an era of technological growth.
posted by rocco at 3:54 PM on January 8, 2011 [2 favorites]


FYI maybe we should all travel like Werner Herzog, whose super-human> exploits have oft been chronicled upon these pages, who walked from Munich to Paris. Of course, ancient religious pilgrims often made even longer journeys on foot to Mecca, Jerusalem, and other such places.
posted by melissam at 3:55 PM on January 8, 2011


In the annals of human hypocrisy...

He said, Hey! You! Get off of his lawn
Hey! You! Get off of his lawn
Hey! You! Get off of his lawn
Don't hang around 'cause two's a yawn
On his lawn....
posted by y2karl at 4:08 PM on January 8, 2011


The Sheraton in Haikou in Hainan, China has a superior waffle-bar to the one in Omaha, NE USA. There Faze happy. See it's not all inconsequential useless banter and comaining about the service.
posted by humanfont at 4:28 PM on January 8, 2011


I suspect that one of the reasons that people who are delayed on or off the tarmac during these blizzards, grow so furious, is because in their hearts, they know they are traveling for a frivolous purpose, and their anger is a combination of guilt and anger at themselves for risking so much discomfort for such trivial purposes.

I suspect that you are totally wrong.
posted by Splunge at 4:31 PM on January 8, 2011 [4 favorites]


It sure doesn't look like peak travel to people in India, China, etc. either. I thought this paper was making a pretty specious mountain of a molehill.
posted by smoke at 4:31 PM on January 8, 2011


I travel by air a lot, though never for work, and I spend a lot of time thinking about the impact that has. I do pretty well in terms of living sustainably, aside from all those flights. But that one activity probably outweighs all the things I manage to do well. And I wouldn't give it up, which pretty clearly makes me part of the problem, just like every other resource-intensive developed-world person who doesn't want to change their habits.
posted by Nothing at 5:13 PM on January 8, 2011


I suspect that one of the reasons that people who are delayed on or off the tarmac during these blizzards, grow so furious, is because in their hearts, they know they are traveling for a frivolous purpose, and their anger is a combination of guilt and anger at themselves for risking so much discomfort for such trivial purposes.
...or they, like so many people in this fast-paced world, are so time-poor that they are furious their precious leisure time is being wasted in a place they don't want to be and under circumstances that they have no control over.
posted by dg at 5:15 PM on January 8, 2011 [2 favorites]


I travel. I have to. I live outside of my home country, and if I want to see my family, I have to get on a plane. There aren't really a lot of other feasible options (trans-pacific container ship passage is pretty expensive, and I don't have that much time off), and so I fly. The recent anti-flying campaigns seem to think that people only fly because they hate the environment, or are reckless spendthrifts who should just stay home. Interestingly, it seems that the sentiment is strongest in England, which, you know, has alternatives to international travel.

I don't have those alternatives. My family is important to me, and I dearly love them and want to see them. I see them much less than I used to, as prices have effectively doubled in the past five years (can anyone tell me why Narita to New York can be had for under $500 round-trip, but Narita to Chicago is rarely under $1000?!). I'm not a reckless bon vivant embarking on poverty tourism as some would obviously like to believe. I just want to see my friends and family once every couple years.
posted by Ghidorah at 6:14 PM on January 8, 2011 [4 favorites]


If a country is governed wisely,
its inhabitants will be content.
They enjoy the labor of their hands
and don't waste time inventing
labor-saving machines.
Since they dearly love their homes,
they aren't interested in travel.
There may be a few wagons and boats,
but these don't go anywhere.
There may be an arsenal of weapons,
but nobody ever uses them.
People enjoy their food,
take pleasure in being with their families,
spend weekends working in their gardens,
delight in the doings of the neighborhood.
And even though the next country is so close
that people can hear its roosters crowing and its dogs barking,
they are content to die of old age
without ever having gone to see it.

-Tao Te Ching


I'm guessing this dude's never cruised through Thunder Bay.
posted by jimmythefish at 6:25 PM on January 8, 2011 [1 favorite]


Travelers, it appears, don't like being called out for being shallow. They love the pompous whooshing about, the renting of cars, and huffing around with suitcases and serious faces. "Look at us, we're important. We have to be someplace. We have to check our calendars. All this exhaust? We're worth it. My meaty self must be transported in winged meat lockers, through the sky, and across the earth, so that I can place my meaty palm in some other meaty palm and we can have a meaty meeting at the expense of all living things on earth. So what if my frozen waste matter comes crashing through your roof, and the noise of my passage rattles your bones, and the filth that spews from my engines coats your world with a fine and killing film of petroleum. My need to travel and patronize the poor, immobile non-travelers of the world with my huge and important vehicles and the vast, paved expanses that serve them, must be honored. My carcass must be hoisted into the air at any cost, and the bag of guts and bones that I am must be vaulted through the heavens, over the heads of the poor, the "flyover people" so that they will know my majesty, so that they will know my strength, so that will know that I ... am ... a traveler ... and I ... have ... been someplace."
posted by Faze at 6:28 PM on January 8, 2011 [5 favorites]


Saw this yesterday at Mother Jones: "Climate change is a problem that is perfectly designed to make people do nothing: It happens far in the future; its effects will be felt most greatly by other people; and the efforts of any one individual are minuscule."

It's nice to have hopeful news once in a while, if only to stave off the fatalism a bit longer.
posted by acheekymonkey at 6:32 PM on January 8, 2011 [2 favorites]


Faze, do you have anything to say about the articles in the FPP? Because your whinging about the attitudes of travellers isn't exactly relevant to the topic of whether there are structural limits to that travel.
posted by harriet vane at 6:52 PM on January 8, 2011 [3 favorites]


I think we might be approaching structural limits in cities and suburbs, but it's hardly a global phenomenon. I'm sure there's still billions of people who'd love to increase their range beyond the next village, and if a cheap transport method was available they'd be on it. It's probably best that we work on providing clean transport methods and better communication systems, for the sake of the environment. But any 'peak travel' concept can really only apply to densely populated areas in developed nations, which isn't anywhere near enough to put a brake on the environmental damage it does.
posted by harriet vane at 6:52 PM on January 8, 2011


Faze you don't understand. This is the Sheraton hotel in Haikou China. They have a waffle bar and tropical foliage, it's the Hawaii of China and a waffle bar. This is the Sheraton in Omaha, NE. It's Nebraska, I don't mean to insult cornhuskers, but seriously you don't have tropical foliage, white sand beaches and no one is calling you the Hawaii of the United States, because we have actual Hawaii. You are a well known Midwestern state, and when one considers the culinary reputation of the American Midwest well waffles are kind of a staple. The thing is the waffles in this semi off the beaten path part of China, were fabulous. Better in fact than the waffles in Omaha. Imagine the reverse.
Also your insults have no affect in me, Hertz assures me that I'm number #1 gold, Hilton will have chocolates and fresh fruit waiting in my room on Tuesday and United actually rolls out a red carpet for me when I get in the plane. You don't even get that kind of validation from your mother. Why would I want to leave that behind? Sure bedbugs and radiation from high altitude flying, and my own children crying for daddy at home. You stop flying for a minute though and they take is all away. I lost my elite status on one airline last year and it's like they don't even know me. That's the worst. I'll never do that again. Hyperbolic to Singapore week after next just to get it back.
posted by humanfont at 7:26 PM on January 8, 2011 [6 favorites]


Nearing capacity? Not even close. When I need to travel out of my city, I try to do it in the middle of the night or VERY early in the morning. Hardly anyone else is around most of the time. Roads are clear, planes are half-empty.
posted by coolguymichael at 7:40 PM on January 8, 2011


All kidding aside, the best french toast, and the best hashbrowns I ever had were at a little cafe in Dali, a little walled city in Yunnan Province in China. I went there pretty much every day for breakfast. I was usually awake before most of the other English teachers on Lunar New Year break, and would go to the cafe, talk to the owners, and have some of the best breakfast in the world. Their muesli was pretty good, too.
posted by Ghidorah at 7:43 PM on January 8, 2011


It seems likely that our need to travel has shrunk substantially.

Well, peaks can come from the demand as well as the supply side.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:55 PM on January 8, 2011


Dear faze, I recall reading your MeTa comments from November and agree with your desire for diversified of opinion. I'd hope that if you continue to engage in this thread that you do so after reading the contributions of your fellow posters and responding to the points that they are raising rather than shitting needlessly with some precanned diatribe. otherwise I will have to doubt your sincerity in wishing to learn from your peers and keeping an open mind.
posted by bl1nk at 9:04 PM on January 8, 2011 [1 favorite]


I always wondered if one day future historians would look back at the demise of the Concorde and see that it represented the end of an era of technological growth.

The end of the Concorde just signals the end of a particular way of thinking. There's still plenty of technological growth left in the aviation industry. The Dreamliner and the A380 are all about per passenger fuel efficiency, while the Concorde was all about speed. The Concorde used more than 8 times as much fuel per passenger compared to a contemporary 747.
posted by KokuRyu at 9:58 PM on January 8, 2011


I travel. I have to. I live outside of my home country, and if I want to see my family, I have to get on a plane.

@Ghidorah: you beat me to it. Thank you. Favorited accordingly.

Haters gonna hate, or some such business.
posted by the_royal_we at 4:04 AM on January 9, 2011


FYI maybe we should all travel like Werner Herzog, whose super-human> exploits have oft been chronicled upon these pages, who walked from Munich to Paris. Of course, ancient religious pilgrims often made even longer journeys on foot to Mecca, Jerusalem, and other such places.
posted by melissam at 3:55 PM on January 8 [+] [!]


Thanks melissam, that gives me a whole lot more respect for Herzog than I previously had. You can't help but have new eyes after a long distance journey on foot.
posted by Ahab at 5:38 AM on January 9, 2011


Faze: I think you have made your point about disliking frivolous travel.

Back to the topic at hand - I wonder if the lack of a new mode of transportation in industrialized countires has prevented more dramatic increases in distances, hence the results. We have had this cycle of speed improvements in transportation modes (walking -> bicycle-> horse+cart-> street-car -> train -> automobile -> plane -> (concorde); and it has ended there. The architects MDRDV have written that the width of a city is approximately one hour, which more or less is reflected in city size based on when those modes of transport existed.

Planes travel at roughly the same speed, and assuming we have a more or less fixed-time budget for travel; then it seems logical we will plateau in the countries studied.
posted by a womble is an active kind of sloth at 5:47 AM on January 9, 2011


Thanks melissam, that gives me a whole lot more respect for Herzog than I previously had. You can't help but have new eyes after a long distance journey on foot.

Of course, you can't help but have your knees replaced afterwards. Mine are aching just thinking about it.
posted by kurosawa's pal at 6:46 AM on January 9, 2011 [1 favorite]


And if you travel on Christmas eve, you might get a gift.
posted by bwg at 7:03 AM on January 9, 2011


The Future Isn’t What It Used To Be: Changing Trends And Their Implications For Transport Planning (PDF)
posted by flug at 9:14 AM on January 9, 2011 [1 favorite]


I now suspect that it's the shallowest people who travel the most.

The other day I caught myself thinking that I'd like to see more of the world and its people to broaden my horizons, but just before I really started to plan a trip or something, I stopped myself, realizing how truly shallow I was for wanting that. Close call.
posted by reductiondesign at 2:31 PM on January 9, 2011


Faze, all of your upper middle class peers are twats. Suggest you meet some new people. Nobody I know talks or thinks like that about the trips they take.
posted by wilful at 5:30 PM on January 9, 2011


On my list of sins against human decency, cynicism ranks a lot higher (i.e., worse) than hypocrisy.

Congrats on achieving both at once!
posted by Sys Rq at 12:41 AM on January 10, 2011


« Older Fernando Vicente creates his own Body Worlds*, sho...  |  A box of raisins saves a famil... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments