Cosa succede alla Battersea Power Station?

Vai all’articolo in INGLESE

Dopo la decisione di Apple di trasferire il suo quartier generale all’interno della Battersea Power Station, abbiamo assistito ad un picco di attenzione mediatica nei confronti dell’edificio art deco, gemma del patrimonio architettonico nazionale. Negli ultimi mesi, al contrario, le vicende che riguardano Battersea Power Station sembrano scomparse dai media mainstream. Ciò non significa che nulla sia successo e Spectacle ha continuato a monitorare le iniziative della Battersea Power Station Development Company – società che gestisce il progetto di rigenerazione – attorno alla monumentale centrale elettrica progettata da Giles Gilbert Scott e tanto amato da Londinesi e non. Sfortunatamente molte delle novità non sono confortanti.

Cattive notizie o buone notizie? Come sempre buono e cattivo sono mescolati nel linguaggio commerciale e ogni fatto è filtrato ad arte in base alle convenienze. Per esempio il grande pubblico certamente è stato messo al corrente del fatto che la più grande e ricca azienda al mondo, Apple, ha manifestato l’intenzione di trasferire i suoi uffici all’interno della centrale elettrica al termine dei lavori di ristrutturazione. Apple è stata salutata positivamente, come abbiamo segnalato, praticamente da tutti i mass media (tra gli altri segnaliamo BBC, The Guardian, Evening Standard). Nel frattempo solamente il nostro blog ha dato notizia della demolizione totale dalla parete est della centrale, rimossa per far posto a finestre e dare così luce ai nuovi uffici della Apple.

Battersea Power Station - three of the four chimneys have been rebuilt

Battersea Power Station – tre delle quattro ciminiere sono state ricostruite (Spectacle, 10/03/17)

Questa triste perdita, andata sotto completo silenzio in tutti gli altri media, è in linea con la curiosa strategia conservativa ‘distruggi per preservare’ ripetutamente applicata a porzioni della Battersea Power Station. Nonostante le migliori pratiche conservative del patrimonio storico architettonico prevedano il mantenimento della maggior parte dei manufatti esistenti, nel caso di Battersea si è deciso di procedere alla demolizione delle ciminiere e alla ricostruzione di repliche. Secondo noi questo è uno degli esempi più evidenti delle storture prodotte dall’intervento di interessi finanziari nel campo della conservazione, come abbiamo cercato di mostrare nel nostro film Battersea Power Station: Selling an Icon

Le demolizioni (ciminiere e parete est) sono state approvate da tutte le agenzie di controllo (in primis Historic England e il Municipio di Wandsworth) e giustificate in nome del bene ultimo rappresentato dal riportare in vita la Battersea Power Station. Ma quale bene è stato prodotto finora dal megaprogetto di rigenerazione, valutato in 9 miliardi di sterline e tra i più grandi in Europa? I lavori per la ricostruzione delle ciminiere sono andati avanti e, al momento, tre ciminiere nuove di zecca spiccano sulle rovine della centrale elettrica. Se tutto va bene, presto i londinesi saranno di nuovo in grado di ammirare tutte e quattro le ciminiere nello skyline di Battersea. Peccato siano false. Meglio di niente? Forse…

Pubblico non Pubblico

La Battersea Power Station Development Company, attraverso il suo amministratore delegato Rob Tincknell, ha recentemente annunciato l’apertura di una passeggiata lungo il Tamigi: “Siamo lieti di poter aprire nuovi spazi pubblici per Londra e di poter condurre la Power Station e i suoi dintorni di nuovo al centro della vita londinese” (dall’Evening Standard). Nonostante l’entusiasmo dell’annuncio, lo ‘spazio pubblico’ cui si riferisce Rob Tincknell è nient’altro che una breve passaggio pedonale privato, schiacciato tra il fiume e la cosiddetta Fase 1 del progetto. La passeggiata sarà integrata al più ampio lungofiume che sarà aperto al pubblico di fronte alla Power Station. Come il resto dell’area, anche questo spazio è tecnicamente privato e solo aperto al pubblico, cosa ben diversa dall’essere uno ‘spazio pubblico’ tout court.

BPS_Collage_Riverside

Mentre eravamo intenti a fare delle riprese sulla nuova passeggiata, i membri della crew di Spectacle, ingenui, sono caduti nel tranello retorico dello ‘spazio pubblico’ pubblicizzato dai costruttori e si sono comportati come se davvero lo fosse. Sfortunatamente siamo stati ricondotti alla realtà da un membro del servizio di sicurezza venuto a ricordarci che il padrone di casa aveva deciso che non era permesso fumare in tutta l’area. Grazie al giudizioso gestore, la nostra salute è stata salvaguardata. Ci sembra però improbabile che uno spazio sottoposto a controllo privato possa garantire un libero godimento del lungofiume. Se i proprietari decidessero di bandire i picnic (magari per dare una mano i loro ristoratori) o manifestazioni di protesta, non ci sarebbe molto di cui lamentarsi: questo è ciò che accade quando si privatizzano spazi pubblici.

The Guardian in passato ha lanciato un allarme sugli effetti già prodotti dalla sovrapposizione di pubblico e privato lungo le sponde del Tamigi, diventato, secondo la loro indagine un “labirinto incomprensibilmente complesso di ostacoli privati e confusione tra municipi – nonché un campo di battaglia sui diritti di transito che potrebbe avere serie ripercussioni sull’accesso pubblico al fiume”. Non un grande preludio verso quella che i costruttori offrono come un’esperienza unica.

Planning non Planning

Le pretenziose 230 pagine del ‘manifesto’ su Place Making prodotte dalla Battersea Power Station Development Company riserva un ruolo fondamentale alla diversità di usi e di inquilini. Nonostante l’impegno a costruire case (alcune delle quali a prezzo calmierato) per la popolazione londinese, i proprietari hanno cambiato idea, passando da appartamenti di lusso a uffici.

THE_PLACEBOOK

La Battersea Power Station Development Company ha presentato istanza per un cambio d’uso della cosiddetta Fase 3 del progetto. I costruttori hanno intenzione di trasformare due edifici, progettati dalle star dell’architettura contemporanea Frank Gehry and Norman Foster – i cui appartamenti sono talaltro già in vendita – da uso residenziale a uffici. Il Financial Times nel darne notizia, presenta come causa di tale cambio il drastico crollo dei prezzi degli immobili di lusso, mentre la domanda di spazi per uffici si manterrebbe alta così come il loro valore. Rob Tincknell ha così giustificato la mossa al Financial Times: “L’aspetto positivo dei progetti a lungo termine è che possono adattarsi al mercato. Se non c’è mercato per immobili residenziali e un mercato molto florido per gli uffici, allora costruiamo uffici”.

Lo stesso Tincknell – che adesso esalta la flessibilità – in passato ha rilasciato un’intervista a Peter Watts, autore di ‘Up in Smoke’, testo sulla storia di Battersea Power Station, sottolineando come la propria azienda avesse prodotto una ricetta infallibile per rendere Battersea un luogo perfetto: “57% residenziale. Del restante 43%, che corrisponde a circa 315.000 mq, 110.000 mq in negozi e ristoranti, 158.000 mq in uffici e il resto con un buon bilanciamento di hotel, tempo libero e spazi per la comunità”. Ci domandiamo che cosa è successo a questo piano pseudoscientifico per mescolare usi e gente, secondo gli autori risultato di lunghe consultazioni con gli abitanti dell’area. Forse non era così importante dato che oggi Tincknel può riferire al Financial Times: “è facile immaginare di aggiungere 93.000 mq (di uffici)” e cancellare dal progetto un hotel e un bel po’ di appartamenti.

Il Battersea Power Station Community Group, praticamente l’ultima voce critica rimasta a mettere in discussione il progetto e le cui opinioni non sono mai state prese in considerazione dalla proprietà nel corso delle consultazioni, si sono scagliati contro la proposta: “Gli edifici di Gehry e Foster dovrebbero diventare case a uso sociale, con prezzi calmierati. Potrebbero esserci uffici ai piani bassi. Mentre assistiamo alla crisi abitativa più grave che sia mai stata vissuta a Londra, non si può dare via questi edifici nella loro interezza ad uso uffici”.

Continuate a seguirci per aggiornamenti e nuove contraddizioni generate dalla megarigenerazione di Battersea Power Station.

Watch more videos on Battersea Power Station
Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.

Spectacle homepage                                                                                                      Like Spectacle Documentaries on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Battersea Power Station Pop-Up Park ‘pops off’

IMG_9991

Last May, the Battersea Power Station developers opened what they announced as a Pop-Up Park, that would receive visitors from all over the world every weekend and host several events. The so called public park, that was even added to Google Maps, ( how did that happen?) soon ‘popped off’ and in late September closed its doors.

The Power Station is one of the few obstacles preventing walkers from strolling along the south side of the Thames Path. For years this path has been blocked– a fading sign claimed it was a “construction site” even though really it was a very agreeable and exclusive river front office for construction company Berkeley Homes. The Berkeley Group (Berkeley, St James, St George, St Edward ) are responsible for ”delivering” many of the ugly and soulless developments despoiling the south bank.

IMG_9990In a new sign hanging on the now closed door, the developers claim the reason why they are shutting access to the park is related to the beginning of restoration works of the Power Station. In fact phase 1, which has barely started, is the building of monstrous flats in the slither of land along the rail track, forever obscuring the wonderful views from the west. “Restoration” (or desecration depending on your view of art deco architecture) of the power station is phase 2.

The sign also states that they have had “a great time hosting over 55,000 guests” in the pop up park. Are they are including in that number the more than 30,000 people that visited the building during the London Open House weekend? If so the pop up park was already closed then. Or do they count those attending the numerous events they have hosted, regardless of the alleged danger of the chimneys falling, on the south side of the site?

Finally it suggests you write to zkelly@bpsdc.co.uk if you would like to discuss putting on an event- It would seem danger from the chimneys only affects the non-paying public but not private, paying guests.

Perhaps “PR Park” would be a more appropriate name than “pop-up Park”.

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.

Spectacle homepage
Like Spectacle Documentaries on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

London Evening Standard loves the future outlook of a wrecked Battersea Power Station

To start with, a few months ago the London Evening Standard proudly presented their collaboration with the owners of the Battersea Power Station on the ‘The Power 1000 – London’s most influential people 2013‘.

BPSeveningstandardpower1000_1

The endangered building was used as a backdrop for the party, no one seemed to be scared of the chimneys collapsing on them, even though the Standard had previously reported that they must be unsafe. The uncritical, back slapping love-in was topped with speeches from Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, Sarah Sands, Evening Standard Editor and Rob Tincknell,  Battersea Power Station chief executive.

And in the 13th November edition about ‘Battersea’s rebirth’ they enthusiastically trumpet the ‘creation of a completely new district where none existed before’.

Wandsworth Tory Leader Ravi Govindia claimed the area will “change faster and more dramatically than any other part of London”- perhaps but maybe not for the better.

As is their custom the owners of Battersea Power Station attempted to deflect the mounting criticism of their plans to demolish the chimneys by wheeling out their gimmicky use of the top of the chimneys, this time not for a single table restaurant, but a viewing platform.

A double page free puff for the Battersea Power Station project:

BPSeveningstandardFULL

Don’t expect the Evening Standard to be digging too deep, or indeed reporting at all, on the controversies surrounding the Power Station demolitions.

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.

Spectacle homepage
Like Spectacle Documentaries on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Battersea Power Station -masters of spin

The new owners of Battersea Power Station may not know much about property development, but they do have excellent PR. The hugely successful Open House London day attracted tens of thousands of visitors who queued for hours to catch a brief glimpse of this much loved building.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

However, in PR terms, it was a bit of an own goal. As only a few days later, the World Monuments Fund listed Battersea Power Station as an endangered world heritage site. See our blog on this.

This very significant listing was hardly commented on in the media. Despite its big PR it was’nt even mentioned in the very slick newsletter of the owners. The inclusion was only visible in some mainstream media:

”Battersea Power Station ‘at risk’ says the heading of an article in the Times. And according to the the Express:

”The Grade II listed London landmark is among 67 heritage

sites that are at risk from natural, economic, social and political forces according to The World Monuments Fund (WMF). The decommissioned coal-fired power station was joined on the list by the beautiful Italian city of Venice and the little known Hong Kong village of Pokfulam.”

The Local Guardian on the inclusion:

”WMF have said they aim to keep a spotlight on the current redevelopment plans for the station, particularly focusing on the re-building of it’s four chimneys.”

Noticeably, they claim it to be one of the best-loved landmarks of the capital.

The Evening standard did not mention this embarassing listing either. Since they recently made Battersea Power Station a front cover image as part of their association with “The Power 1000 – London’s most Influential People” critical reporting of Battersea Power Station from the Standard, which was always weak, has been significantly lacking.

See our full article about the owners’ pro – active approach to media management.

Interestingly, the owners were unable to provide visitors with updated information about the new phasing of the demolishing of the chimneys. This was left to a small group of local volunteers of the Battersea Power Station Community Group.

Watch our video about the demonstration against these plans during London open house.

The owners have also not mentioned their plans to make a bio fuel power station. If you think bio fuels sounds good, look at this chart. And then there’s the PR problem with main partner Sime Darby’s significant role in deforestation and the extinction of the Orang u Tang.

Despite these obstacles, they are still winning the PR – war as many people believe they are going to start to renovate the Power Station “at last”. However, phase 1 is only building ugly greedy soulless flats for investors that will block most of the views. And phase 2 involves demolishing the chimneys and, they claim, replacing them with replicas.

The current agreement is that they have permission to take down one, and that is including the art deco brickwork on the top. They will rebuild the first one to 25 meters, which is about halfway. When they have reached that point, they can take the other three chimneys down and then they will continue rebuilding the first.
So it’s essentially one plus three. Now at some point down that route, if there’s a default, the developer either refuses, or claim they ‘cannot put them back up’ or they run out of money, the chimneys, like the roof, will not be put back. The cost of putting back three and a half chimneys is massive- far more than the “bond” being asked.

BPSsavethechimneys

They are also not keen to draw attention to their recent request to dismantle the two listed cranes that are disgracefully being allowed to rust away, in order to provide a jetty for taking underground extension tunnel soil out via the river. They have a very long water front it is typical that they should insist it can only work by demolishing the cranes.

To us and any one interested, except English Heritage and Wandsworth council who collude in the hidden master plan, the owners are pursuing a policy of demolition by stealth.

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.

Spectacle homepage
Like Spectacle Documentaries on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Letter to Architects Journal on Battersea Power Station phase 3

Keith Garner‘s ( architect and member of the Battersea Power Station Community Group) non-edited letter to the Architects’ Journal.  A critical look at Foster and Gehry, the chosen designers for phase 3 of the Battersea Power Station:

                       BPS_NewPlan_1

”Your report about the appointment of Foster and Gehry to the Battersea Power Station project hits the nail on the head.  (AJ web site 23rd October.)   New buildings on the Battersea Power Station site would certainly be highly visible “… from passing commuter trains”.  The one thing you won’t see of course will be Battersea Power Station itself,  which would be  obscured by thousands of new flats in blocks up to 18 storeys high, to be built as part of the Viñoly master plan.

This would be a very great shame given the evident pleasure that commuters and visitors to London derive from  seeing  Battersea Power Station from the train:  certainly  to judge by the number of people who take photographs as they go by and then post them on  Twitter and Instagram.

The truth is that the Viñoly master plan is fatally flawed.  This is because the quantum of development it foresees will destroy Battersea Power Station’s significance as an urban landmark.   It really doesn’t matter how distinguished the architects are who design individual buildings. No good will happen at Battersea until the master plan itself is ditched.

Indeed, rather than allowing new commercial buildings to proceed before Battersea Power Station  is repaired,  nothing should happen on the site until the future of the Grade II* listed building is itself secured.  In that regard, Foster & Gehry would be better employed working alongside Wilkinson Eyre on Battersea Power Station itself, rather than in designing new buildings adjacent.

Part of the reason why the current scheme for Battersea Power Station is so wildly off beam is that its underlying premise is to fund the repairs to the listed building from the proceeds of surrounding commercial development.  But if the resulting over-scaled buildings destroy the significance of Battersea Power Station as a urban landmark – as they surely will – then what’s the point?

It would be far better to transfer ownership of Battersea Power Station to a public interest trust and to repair the building with funds from the Lottery.   Rob Tincknell should agree to this: it relieves the consortium of the responsibility of looking after the listed building – something they are plainly not interested in – and lets them get on with the job of making a return for their investors.

The consortium would develop the surrounding site (in a manner that respects the monumentality of the listed building and preserves key views e.g. from the railway viaduct) and would have a lease from the trust for use of the unlisted parts of Battersea Power Station itself, i.e. most of it.   As a quid pro quo for the use of Lottery money, the public would have free access to the listed interiors which could be used for any number of educationally or culturally uplifting pursuits.

This seems like the basis of an equitable settlement to me. What is needed is an organisation to take it forward.  For too long, English Heritage has stood on the sidelines whilst the situation at Battersea Power Station has descended in to black farce.   As the government’s advisor on the historic environment, it should be their responsibility to rescue the building from the fate that currently awaits it and to pursue a civilised alternative based on trust ownership.

Incidentally, the AJ hasn’t – as far as I am aware – reported the news that the World Monuments Fund had just added Battersea Power Station to its list of world heritage in danger for 2014.  This is the second time Battersea Power Station has been added to the list – the first was in 2004 – and reflects the World Monuments Fund’s ongoing concerns about the situation at Battersea and the motivations of the current owners.”

BPS_NewPlan_3

See Merlin Fulcher’s original article that provoked Keith’s comments.

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.

Spectacle homepage
Like Spectacle Documentaries on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Keith Garner on Rob Tincknell

Keith Garner, local architect and member of the Battersea Power Station Community Group, has laid out a tyraid of questions to the chief executive of the Battersea Power Station Development Company, Rob Tincknell.

In an article described as ‘sycophantic and uncritical’ by Garner, Tincknell answered a series of questions about his involvement with the new plans for the regeneration of Battersea Power Station.

Garner responded strongly to the article, posing probing questions that still need answering. For example;

Why did Treasury Holdings not complete any substantive work in the five years they owned Battersea Power Station between 2006 and 2011, when you were in charge?

Why is the river walk connecting to Battersea Park still not built when your colleagues at Treasury Holdings promised at a meeting in 2011 that this would be done?

Why are you currently carrying out a “public consultation”, when it is clear that you have no intention of responding to any of the concerns raised?

The list ended with Garner asking, ‘Perhaps you would put some of these questions to Rob Tincknell as well?’

We can’t see the Architects Journal being so bold, but are keen to have these questions answered ourselves.

If you have any questions you want answering, let us know and we’ll try to pose them to the companies behind Battersea.

You can read the article itself, and Keith’s full response here, http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/daily-news/rob-tincknell-committed-to-battersea/8635755.article

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.

Spectacle homepage
Add Spectacle Documentaries on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Battersea Buddleia Returns

A picture of what is believed to be Buddleia growing beneath Battersea Power Station’s south east chimney taken earlier this month shows the continued degradation of the grade 2 listed building. English Heritage seem to be blasé about the upkeep of the iconic building, having allowed such a large plant to take hold amongst the scaffolding.

Photo courtesy of Keith Garner

Sime Darby, the Malaysian Company who bought the aging building earlier this year, finalised the contract last night. With their plans to regenerate the power station set to start within months.

Despite Sime Darby’s history of global deforestation ( see Friends of the Earth report)  in relation to their Palm Oil business, they have had put little effort into the removal of this particular plant.

Tan Sri Liew Kee Sin, leader of the consortium, has claimed that the regeneration will produce up to 26,000 jobs. But how long will these jobs remain, and at what expense to the power station itself will this take over cause?

Tan Sri Liew Kee Sin claims they will build “a vibrant, accessible and functional town centre for Vauxhall, Nine Elms, Battersea area”. A town centre completely privately owned.

We aim to interview English Heritage about Battersea Power Station, do you have any questions you want posing to them?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca

Battersea Power Station owners deep in debt

REO co-owner Rob Tincknell

Property firm REO, whose portfolio includes Battersea Power Station, owes millions of euro to its banks, and to the Irish taxpayer.

The company owes a total of €2bn to its banks. This includes nearly €1bn owed to Nama, Ireland’s National Asset Management Agency – set up by the Irish government to take on the debts of banks bailed out in the financial crisis.

With a property portfolio valued at €1.3bn (including the Battersea site, whose valuation is problematic in itself), the company’s debts now far outstrip its assets.

That’s not the end of REO’s problems: it recorded a pre-tax loss of £900m for the 14 months to February 2010. The announcement of those accounts, in June this year, caused a 50% fall in the company’s share price, taking it down to just 8 pence per share, and a market value below £40m. The company is not in good financial health.

So it’s perhaps not surprising that REO are looking to separate the potentially lucrative Battersea Power Station site from the company as a whole. They hope to draw off the property into a separate company, and list it on the stock market before the end of the year.

Investment partners are being sought to help fund the project, with international property groups and Middle Eastern wealth funds thought to be expressing interest.

But these grand plans could be brought to a halt if Wandsworth Borough Council decide not to grant planning permission. Elsewhere on the Spectacle Blog you can find out more about the historical preservation groups who are opposing the developer’s plans for the site.

You can also watch our interview with Alex Baldwin of the Victorian Society and other clips about the power station in the Spectacle video archive.

Click Battersea Power Station for more blogs
Or visit PlanA our general blog on urbanism, planning and architecture.
See our Battersea Power Station project pages for more information and videos.

Spectacle homepage
Befriend Spectacle.Docs on Facebook
Follow SpectacleMedia on Twitter

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Buzz
  • Identi.ca