Home » Energy

Category Archives: Energy

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Catacylsm
Click on image to purchase

Post categories

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Cataclysm
Click on image to purchase

We Have A Deal: OPEC Agrees In Principle To A “Real” Production Increase Of 600,000 Barrels/Day

What was expected to be a drawn-out affair, with Iran potentially resisting and even leading to the collapse of the cartel, moments ago OPEC reached a deal in principle to raise oil production by 1 million b/d on paper, and in reality by 600 kb/d as many of the OPEC nations are already tapped out and unable to produce more.


OPEC reaches deal in principle to raise 1 mil b/d “on paper”: BBG. Brent up $1.30 on Thu’s close, around $74.41/barrel.

“Real” increase of 600,000 b/d: BBG


The deal is roughly what the committee had agreed to yesterday and is the plan pushed by Saudi Arabia all week.

As Bloomberg notes, this is the deal traders have been waiting for:

The fear was that, if the meeting broke up in disarray, Saudi Arabia would simply open the taps and other producers would follow suit, unleashing far more supply than the market needed. What this deal does is to bring some order to the process of easing supply restraint.

Indeed, absent some last minute shock, Iran appears to have gone along with the majority and will comply with what is effectively A Saudi-Russian decision, prompted by Trump complaints for the cartel to produce more oil .

As Bloomberg further adds, any distribution of output increases among OPEC and non-OPEC members “is going to create winners and losers.”

While the headline number is what will matter for oil prices, the relative gains and losses against their fellow members will also be important to the participants. That could mean ministers still have a way to go before they are finally done. But the fact that they have got as far as they have means that cohesion has, once again, proved paramount.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

The tales of history are a dead-end road

The tales of history are a dead-end road

Culture is what people do. It decays when people stop culturing. Changing a culture means changing what we do. Often, that will need a step by step transition as we negotiate obstacles. Even though we follow some backward meanders, the river may flow on.

But there are some transitionary illusions – convenient untruths, which are not obstacles to be overcome, but dead-end roads to be avoided. In those cases, we must turn back and begin again.

Dead-end roads (or stagnant backwaters) can be paved (or punted) with the best intentions – often because we are focused on singularly-important things, such as energy-use, pesticides, human rights… We applaud solar panels on the buildings of a retail park, or the rising quantity of organic and fairly-traded produce in the super market swamp. But retail parks and super markets were created by and are maintained by fossil fuel. Greening such infrastructures gives them an illusory credence. It satisfies complacent images of social justices, green energy and regenerative farming. But what came with oil must go with oil. However green we strive to make them the retail park and super market remain vast and stagnant backwaters.

We lazily mined those millions of years of sequestered photosynthesis. Now we must live by singular seasons as they pass. The thing about natural limits, is that they have shape – taste, scent, sound, mass, energy, volume, chronology… We can give them meaning, and if we know them truly, they can gain beauty.

Buying organic produce (for instance) in a super market defers a large part of cultural creation to infrastructures, which we cannot see, or taste. Those green market signals are not signs to a better future but delusive advertisements to the virtues of a dead-end road.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

What science fiction ought to be

What science fiction ought to be

Science fiction has become the dominant genre of the last four decades – the biggest film of the year has been sci-fi almost every year in my lifetime. Of those, some are simply swashbuckler fantasies set in space, like Star Wars, while others are the very entertaining superhero fantasies that have become as ubiquitous as Westerns or musicals once were. Each year, however, brings a new wave of dystopian post-apocalyptic films – in the last year we’ve had Blade Runner 2049, Ready Player One, War for the Planet of the Apes, Geostorm, and later this year we can expect Alita and Mortal Engines

I say “dystopian,” because science fiction used to be creating utopian futures in which mankind had solved most of its problems – Star Trekbeing one of the only survivors of that age. In the time that science fiction has dominated our culture, though, it has been about something else: telling us how hopeless our future is, and how we’re all doomed.

They have a point; we have created a society that runs on coal and oil, which won’t last forever. Even the amount we’ve burned so far has changed the air so much that it is literally changing the weather around the world, creating more intense storms, harsher droughts, and greater extremes of heat and cold. Anyone who walks along the Irish shoreline can see the other main product of our civilisation, the plastic and other rubbish that now clutters the world’s seas, or piles up in landfills that have become the largest man-made structures on Earth.

Yet apocalyptic stories assume that our modern car-driving, computer-using culture will collapse overnight in some catastrophe, whether a robot Armageddon, climate disaster or Rapture – and the fact that we make entertainment about such horrors means that they are not really our fears, but our fantasies.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

What Will Follow The Age Of Oil?

What Will Follow The Age Of Oil?

LNG carrier

U.S. natural gas production will increase by 10 percent this year alone and by as much as 60 percent by 2037, a new report from IHS Markit has forecast. The market research company is extremely upbeat about U.S. gas because of the shale gas revolution, seeing the country becoming a leading LNG exporter thanks to this revolution as well.

Besides production, IHS analysts also raised their estimates of gas supply in the United States that is economical at prices below the US$4 per MMBtu Henry Hub benchmark price—from 900 trillion cubic feet in 2010 to 1,250 trillion cubic feet. Thanks to this consistent cost decline, IHS expects natural gas to come to account for almost half of power generation in the country by 2040, from about 42 percent today.

To date, the U.S. produces around 81 billion cubic feet of natural gas daily. That’s up from 50 billion cubic feet before the shale boom, but if IHS estimates are correct, the daily average will expand to 118 billion cubic feet by 2037.

That’s good news for the power generation sector where coal and nuclear plants are being retired at a faster pace now that there is so much cheap gas around. Moody’s earlier this month estimated that growing gas production will make it possible to offset the loss of 35 GW of power generation capacity from plant retirements over the next five years. Sure, some renewable installation additions will help, too, but gas-fired plants will be the dominant alternative to coal and nuclear.

Since the United States cannot consume all this gas, a lot more of it will go to international markets, with IHS expecting the daily average LNG export rate in five years at a minimum of 10 billion cubic feet natural gas equivalent. That’s up from an estimated 3 billion cubic feet this year and 1.9 billion cubic feet last year.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Neoliberalism, Pipelines, and Canadian Political Economy

Neoliberalism, Pipelines, and Canadian Political Economy

Photo by Luke Jones | CC BY 2.0

The national debate about how to get diluted bitumen to trans-oceanic markets by means of a twinning of the existing Kinder Morgan pipeline route between Alberta and British Columbia – known as the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project – illustrates the sad state of economic planning, diversification and vision in Canada.

The current policy of dependence on the sale of carbon-based energy resources, coupled with reliance on residential real estate construction and sale, is a short-sighted environmental and industrial strategy for a nation such as Canada. The country’s forecast continued dependence on the extraction of oil and gas, the burning of which our planet can no longer sustain, along with our primary devotion to the FIRE (Finance, Insurance and Real Estate) model of wealth creation does not serve the well-being of all Canadians nor preserve our natural environment. Instead, we should be considering alternative economic approaches that affirm Canadian economic sovereignty through the creation of jobs and socially re-invested dividends linked to a sustainable future.

It is time we organize our economy along different lines, putting people, communities and the environment ahead of pipeline revenues, quarterly profits, and energy stock prices. That this may pose challenges is not a matter of dispute. Nevertheless, our reluctance to revise or discard established ways of doing things has been an impediment to change in the past.  This was noted fifty years ago by the distinguished Canadian economic historian Harold Innis, who, in discussing our political culture, noted our “infinite capacity for self-congratulation.”  This complacency is perhaps not surprising when one considers our rich abundance of resources, land, and water; our good fortune to be situated next to the world’s economic behemoth which possessed an apparently insatiable appetite for our raw materials and commodities; and, finally, our small population occupying an immense landmass according each individual an almost blessed sense of space, ease and, for a time, opportunity.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The BP 2018 Statistical Review, electricity and CO2 emissions

The BP 2018 Statistical Review, electricity and CO2 emissions

The just-issued 2018 BP Statistical Review contains a number of variables that were not available in previous reports, in particular electricity generation from oil, gas and coal since 1985. Combining these variables with BP’s nuclear, hydro and renewables generation numbers and with BP’s CO2 emissions data reveals the following:

• The world has made no progress towards decarbonizing its electricity sector over the last 32 years. In 1985 it generated 35% of its electricity from low-carbon sources (hydro, nuclear, renewables). In 2017 it generated 34%. Mostly this is a result of rapid emissions growth in China.

  • Of the country groups considered only the EU28 has made any significant progress towards decarbonization (from 59% low-carbon generation in 1985 to 44% in 2017). EU28 emissions, however, make up only a small fraction of total global emissions.
  • In 2017 electricity generation accounted for probably less than a third of total global greenhouse gas emissions, which include CO2, methane, NOx etc. Targeting electricity sector emissions while ignoring emissions from other sectors is therefore pointless.

Electricity generation

BP’s generation data are summarized on the following four Figures, each of which contains a graph showing total generation by source followed by a graph showing the percentage contribution of each source to the generation mix between 1985, when the BP data begin, and 2017.

Figure 1 shows global electricity generation. The first graph shows global electricity generation growing by an average of about 3% annually since 1985, although the rate of increase has slowed marginally (to about 2.4% annually) since 2010. Of particular interest is the fact that increased generation from renewables (solar, wind, bio) has been sufficient to cover only about half of the increase in world electricity demand over the last ten years or so. The most remarkable thing about the second graph is the absence of any significant change.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

China’s Oil Trade Retaliation is Iran’s Gain

China’s Oil Trade Retaliation is Iran’s Gain

I’ve told you that once you start down the Trade War path forever will it dominate your destiny.

Well here we are.  Trump slaps big tariffs on aluminum and steel in a bid to leverage Gary Cohn’s ICE Wall plan to control the metals and oils futures markets.   I’m not sure how much of this stuff I believe but it is clear that the futures price for most strategically important commodities are divorced from the real world.

Alistair Crooke also noted the importance of Trump’s ‘energy dominance’ policy recently, which I suggest strongly you read.

But today’s edition of “As the Trade War Churns” is about China and their willingness to shift their energy purchases away from U.S. producers.  Irina Slav at Oilprice.com has the good bits.

The latest escalation in the tariff exchange, however, is a little bit different than all the others so far. It’s different because it came after Beijing said it intends to slap tariffs on U.S. oil, gas, and coal imports.

China’s was a retaliatory move to impose tariffs on US$50 billion worth of U.S. goods, which followed Trump’s earlier announcement that another US$50 billion in goods would be subjected to a 25-percent tariff starting July 6.

It’s unclear as to what form this will take but there’s also this report from the New York Times which talks about the China/U.S. energy trade.

Things could get worse if the United States and China ratchet up their actions [counter-tariffs]. Mr. Trump has already promised more tariffs in response to China’s retaliation. China, in turn, is likely to back away from an agreement to buy $70 billion worth of American agricultural and energy products — a deal that was conditional on the United States lifting its threat of tariffs.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Global Energy Consumption Soars To New Heights

Global Energy Consumption Soars To New Heights

solar energy park

This week the 2018 BP Statistical Review of World Energy was released, which covers energy data through 2017. It is the definitive source for global energy production and consumption figures, and a primary source of data for numerous companies, government agencies and non-government organizations.

I will take a deeper dive into the report in upcoming articles, but today I want to cover some of the highlights.

First, the report shows that the world achieved a new oil production record of 92.6 million barrels per day (BPD), which is the 8th straight year global oil production has increased. The United States was the world’s top oil producer in 2017, exceeding 13 million BPD* for the first time ever. Saudi Arabia was second at 12.0 million BPD, while Russia came in at 11.3 million BPD.

Oil consumption, which is quite a bit higher due to the inclusion of biofuels and fuels derived from coal and natural gas, also set a new record of 98.2 million BPD. U.S. consumption rose by 1.0%, and still leads the world at 19.9 million BPD. China’s demand rose by 4% to a new record of 12.8 million BPD.

Global natural gas production jumped 3.0% to a new record of 355 billion cubic feet per day. The U.S. led all countries in both production and consumption of natural gas.

Global coal consumption increased by 1.0%, but remains 3.5% below the peak reached in 2013. Coal consumption declined in the U.S. and European Union, but crept 0.5% higher in China. China remains the world’s top coal market, with the country consuming 50.7% of the world’s coal in 2017.

Renewables continue to grow at a torrid pace. Global solar power consumption increased by 35%, while wind power consumption rose 17% over 2016.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

GoM: First Quarter 2018, Production Summary

GoM: First Quarter 2018, Production Summary

crude and condensate

BOEM has March 2018 production at 1696 kbpd, which is down 1% month-on-month and 4% year-on-year (March 2017 was the peak production month for GoM so far). EIA numbers were very similar, although last month’s were higher and haven’t been revised yet – typically EIA numbers end up almost exactly corresponding to the BOEM reported total qualified lease production, whereas BOEM can be a little higher, maybe including test wells or non-qualified leases.

chart/

The major new project, Stampede, started in January, has no reported production numbers yet. BOEM and EIA estimate non-reported values and then retrospectively adjust their reports when actual numbers are available. I don’t know how they estimate new production but Stampede could produce around 60 kbpd with current plans, though likely a lot less initially as only one of two leases has been ramping up. I’ve assumed 20 and 40 kbpd for February and March respectively, which still might be high. Even allowing for that, and assuming other late numbers are the same as the previous month, since December EIA and BOEM both have estimates about 30 to 40 kbpd higher than the reported lease and well production numbers (which always match closely) would suggest. Usually the difference is no more than ten. It is unlikely that the other late numbers, of which there are few, and none for all four months, will show such large, sudden and unexplained increases so either I’m missing something (maybe a lease not yet included in the numbers, but also not reported as starting up) or there could be some future downward adjustments.

Rigel and Otis are still off-line following the failure at a subsea manifold last October and are taking out about 22 kbpd plus some gas (Otis is a small gas field). Great White, Stones (for the full month) and Caesar/Tonga all had noticeable downtime in March taking about 90 kbpd off-stream.

chart/

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

U.S.-China Trade War Will Hurt Shale Drillers

U.S.-China Trade War Will Hurt Shale Drillers

Oil rig

President Trump is back on his warhorse called Tariffs, yesterday announcing he was considering the introduction of a 10-percent levy on Chinese goods worth US$200 billion. The latest escalation in the tariff exchange, however, is a little bit different than all the others so far. It’s different because it came after Beijing said it intends to slap tariffs on U.S. oil, gas, and coal imports.

China’s was a retaliatory move to impose tariffs on US$50 billion worth of U.S. goods, which followed Trump’s earlier announcement that another US$50 billion in goods would be subjected to a 25-percent tariff starting July 6. And that’s not all. Now, Trump has said if China does not change its “unfair practices related to the acquisition of American intellectual property and technology” new tariffs on another US$200 billion worth of Chinese goods will follow.

This sounds like a never ending game of chicken with the stakes close to becoming ridiculous. Yet the threat to U.S. oil exports to China is not at all ridiculous: it is very real and should worry drillers.

In a recent column, Reuters analyst Clyde Russell noted that U.S. oil imports into China account for a relatively tiny portion of the total, at 3.5 percent. However, for oil exporters, shipments to China account for 16 percent, both figures based on data from the first five months of 2018. Related: Oil Markets Turn Bearish Ahead Of OPEC Meeting

This is a discrepancy that should be alarming, despite belief among other analysts that U.S. drillers could just sell their barrels of cheap oil elsewhere. This is true, of course, oil is in universal demand. Yet it is also true that China is the biggest buyer, and as Russell put it, it would be easier for China to find new suppliers of crude than it would be for U.S. exporters to find new buyers.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Australia Looks To Tackle Its Looming Gas Shortage

Australia Looks To Tackle Its Looming Gas Shortage

LNG carrier

In a strange about-face for the world’s soon to be top liquified natural gas (LNG) exporter, Australia is now considering importing the fuel. On Monday, ExxonMobil, Australia’s top gas supplier, said it is considering importing the super-cooled fuel to help offset an anticipated gas shortage from 2021 going forward as well as protecting its market share.

ExxonMobil is also stepping up exploration off the coast of Victoria and considering developing a gas field called West Barracouta close to an existing field, the oil major also said in an emailed statement on Monday.

“Combined with the existing Gippsland resource and infrastructure, an LNG import facility could ensure ExxonMobil can continue to meet our customers’ needs,” the company said, adding that the facility could become operational by around 2022.

Looming gas shortage Down Under

This disclosure comes as Australia struggles with a natural gas shortage, a unique phenomenon for the gas exporting giant. Late last year, the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission and the Australian Energy Market Operator said that gas shortfalls in the country for 2018 and 2019 would be much worse than originally forecasted. They both predicted a shortfall of nearly 110 petajoules of gas in 2018 and similar in 2019, which represents about one-sixth of the projected amount of gas demand in Australia.

In light of this growing problem, late last year Canberra threated to put gas export regulations in place, but the idea has been put on hold as the government and suppliers work out a deal.

However, upping the ante even more, Australia’s energy market operator warned in March that Victoria, the country’s biggest gas consuming state, could face shortages from mid-2021 due to a rapid drop in supply from the Gippsland Basin Joint Venture, owned by ExxonMobil and BHP Billiton, Reuters said in a report. Related: The Fed Is Driving Down Oil Prices

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Peak oil in Asia Pacific (part 1)

Peak oil in Asia Pacific (part 1)

This post uses data released by the BP Statistical Review in June 2018

https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html

Oil production seems to have left its bumpy 6 year long (2010-2015) plateau of 8.4 mb/d and is now back to 2004 levels of 7.9 mb/d, a decline of 6% over 2 years.

Asia_oil_production_1965-2017Fig 1: Oil production in Asia –Pacific

Asia_incr-oil_production_2004-2017Fig 2: Incremental oil production

Base production is the sum of the minimum production levels in each country during the period under consideration. Incremental production is the production above that base production. In this way we clearly see that the peak was shaped by China, sitting on a declining wedge of all other Asian countries together. Note that growing production in Thailand and India could not stop that decline. Now let’s look at the other side of the coin, consumption:

Asia_oil_consumption_1965-2017Fig 3: Asia’s oil consumption growth

There has been a relentless increase in consumption since the mid 80s. The growth rate after the financial crisis in 2008 was an average of 3% pa.

China_oil_consumption_growth_2000-17Fig 4: Chinese oil consumption growth rates

Chinese annual oil consumption growth rates have been quite variable between 2% and a whopping 16% in 2004 which contributed to high oil prices. Fig 4 also shows there is little correlation between GDP growth and oil consumption growth (statistical problems?). There is nothing in this graph that could tell us that the Chinese economy has a consistent trend to become less dependent on oil. In the years since 2011, oil consumption growth was around 60% of GDP growth.

Let’s compare China with the US. China’s oil consumption is catching up fast with US consumption.

Comparison_oil_prod-cons_US-China_1965-2017Fig 5: Oil production and consumption: US vs China

On current trends, China’s oil consumption would reach US consumption levels of 20 mb/d in just 14 years.

Comparison_oil-im[ports_US-China_2000-17Fig 6: US and Chinese net oil imports

Contrary to misinformation by the media, the US is still a net importer of oil. Even blind Freddy can see that there will be intense competition for oil on global markets.

Asia_oil_production_consumption_2005-2017_fill_in-2037Fig 7: Oil supply gap for the Asia Pacific

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

The Beast From The East, coal, gas and the UK

The Beast From The East, coal, gas and the UK

In late February 2018 high pressure over the North Atlantic and low pressure over the Mediterranean combined to generate a strong easterly airflow that brought Siberian temperatures to Western Europe, increasing heating demand to the point where there was a shortage of natural gas. The outcome was an increase in UK coal generation, partly because coal briefly became cheaper than gas as a source of electricity generation but mostly because the UK did not have enough gas in storage to fill both home heating and electricity generation needs. The UK, however, plans to shut down all its coal plants by 2025, and in this post I speculate as to what might have happened if they had all been shut down in 2018. The conclusion is that the UK would not have been able to cover peak load deficits during much of the cold period owing to inadequate gas supplies and installed gas capacity.

This post was prompted by the Drax Electric Insights Quarterly linked to by correspondent Ed T in Blowout Week 231. I had not come across this report before, but it provides a good summary of UK quarterly activity and I have plagiarized it where appropriate.

Figure 1 shows UK generation by source over the period between February 1 and March 31 2018, covering the Beast From the East cold periods. The generation data are five-minute Gridwatch values averaged into hourly intervals and the temperature data are daily means from the Met Office Central England temperature site:

Figure 1: UK hourly generation by source and mean daily Central England temperatures, February 1 to March 31 2018

Imports are plotted at the bottom because this is the only way I have found of displaying negative values (exports) on a stacked bar chart. Together with nuclear and biomass they provided reasonably stable baseload generation.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Our energy challenge in 6 eye-popping charts

Our energy challenge in 6 eye-popping charts

Renewable energy is winning and coal is on the skids. Disruption of the fossil fuel industry is well under way, and the global energy system is being decarbonised. We’re right on track, right?

To avoid dramatic climate system tipping points, the world needs to decarbonise very quickly and start drawing down the level of carbon in the atmosphere, because it’s already unsafe. As one dramatic example, in past periods when greenhouse levels were similar to the current level, temperatures were 3–6°C higher and sea levels around 25–40 metres higher than in 1900.

So climate warming is now an existential risk to human civilisation, that is, an adverse outcome that would either annihilate intelligent life or permanently and drastically curtail its potential. It is now too late for incremental, measured steps to protect what we care about. Winning slowly is now the same as losing.

So how are we going with our energy system? It is the predominant source of the dramatic human-caused rise in the level of greenhouse gases, which over the last century has increased 70 percent, from 280 parts per million carbon dioxide equivalent (ppm CO2e) to 480 ppm CO2e.

The question is pertinent, with the Guardian reporting last week, “Rise in global carbon emissions a ‘big step backwards’, says BP” on news that global electricity emissions rose 1.6% in 2017 after flatlining for the previous three years, despite renewable power generation growing by 17% last year, because “strong economic growth led to above-average energy demand, coal use bounced back in China and efficiency gains slowed down, causing emissions to jump”.

And there was this from China:

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Oil Demand Growth Could Start To Soften Soon

Oil Demand Growth Could Start To Soften Soon

Oil

OPEC may tout the production cuts pact as the key driver of oil market rebalancing, but if it weren’t for the strong global oil demand growth of the past three years, we wouldn’t have seen international agencies calling the end of the oil glut.

Demand was strong because the lower-for-longer oil prices between 2015 and 2017 stimulated consumption growth in both mature OECD economies like the United States and most of Western Europe, and in emerging non-OECD markets—China and India in particular.

All oil importing nations benefited from the lower oil prices, but while demand growth in India and China is largely driven by economic expansion and industrial activity, in OECD economies demand is more closely linked with large and sustained changes in oil prices. The 70-percent rally in oil prices since the middle of last year is expected to moderate growth in the more price-sensitive OECD economies, Reuters market analyst John Kemp argues.

Oil demand will continue to increase, largely driven by non-OECD markets like China and India, but the higher oil prices could slacken the pace of the OECD demand growth that could curb global oil demand growth.

Last year, oil demand grew by 1.7 million bpd—similar to the 2016 growth and well above the 10-year average of some 1.1 million bpd, BP said in its BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2018 published this week.

“Not surprisingly, oil demand in 2017 continued to be driven by oil importers benefitting from the windfall of low prices, with both Europe (0.3 Mb/d) and the US (0.2 Mb/d) posting notable increases, compared with average declines over the previous 10 years,” BP noted.

Growth in non-OECD China—500,000 bpd—was closer to its 10-year average, according to the review.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Cataclysm
Click on image to purchase