Home » Energy

Category Archives: Energy

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Catacylsm
Click on image to purchase

Post categories

Post Archives by Category

The Cold Hard Truth About Renewable Energy Adoption

The Cold Hard Truth About Renewable Energy Adoption

  • The energy transition is essential but complex and challenging.
  • The pace of the transition and the balance between future and current energy security are key issues.
  • Economic and logistical barriers, as well as geopolitical and environmental concerns, need to be addressed for a successful transition.
Renewable Energy Adoption

The future of the global energy sector is caught up in a messy and misleading ideological debate. Depending on which politically informed echo chamber one inevitably finds themself confined to on social media, they are either told that the energy transition is a dangerous myth that will end in economic disaster and permanent rolling blackouts, or that clean energy is going to save the world overnight – as soon as conservatives get out of the way. As usual, the truth lies somewhere in between.

The energy transition is strictly necessary. But it’s going to be very, very hard. It’s damaging to deny that there will almost certainly be shocks, missteps, and setbacks as we undergo one of the most disruptive chapters in industrial history. In large part we’re relying on untested and in many cases as-yet unproven technologies to emerge in the nick of time.

There’s a temptation to sugar-coat the scale of the imperative to make the energy transition more palatable and less daunting. But there’s no denying it – it’s a very uncomfortable, and even frightening, petition to be in. And there will be winners and losers as economic priorities shift – the energy transition is good for humanity as a whole, but it certainly isn’t good for everyone. Acknowledging these difficult truths is essential to properly planning for and managing humanity’s greatest cooperative project.

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

Analysis: How low-sulphur shipping rules are affecting global warming

In 2020, international regulations to reduce air pollution from shipping imposed strict limits on the sulphur content of marine fuels.

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) rules have had some success in improving public health. Global emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO2) – a health-damaging air pollutant – have dropped by about 10% as a result.

But the shift to low-sulphur shipping fuel has had an additional consequence.

Sulphur particles contained in ships’ exhaust fumes have been counteracting some of the warming coming from greenhouse gases. But lowering the sulphur content of marine fuel has weakened the masking effect, effectively giving a boost to warming.

Some researchers have proposed that the drop in SO2 as a result of the IMO’s clean air regulations could be behind a recent spike in global sea surface temperature.

Carbon Brief analysis shows that the likely side-effect of the 2020 regulations to cut air pollution from shipping is to increase global temperatures by around 0.05C by 2050. This is equivalent to approximately two additional years of emissions.

While this will contribute to warming and make it even more difficult to avoid exceeding 1.5C in the coming decades, a number of other factors are likely contributing to the ocean heatwave.

These include a massive eruption of an underwater volcano in the south Pacific, an unusual absence of Saharan dust and a growing El Niño.

Phasing down

Nearly all SO2 emissions today are a by-product of fossil fuel combustion.

Globally, SO2 emissions from marine fuel increased from around 6 million tonnes (MtSO2) per year in the 1970s to more than 10MtSO2 per year in the 2000s and 2010s.

SO2 emissions from fossil fuels have long contributed to severe health impacts through the formation of particulate matter known as PM2.5.

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

The Oil and Energy Macro

Energy Aware

U.S. oil reserves reached a new record in 2022. Crude oil and condensate proved reserves exceed 48 billion barrels (Figure 1). Reserves declined from 1969 to 2006 then increased with additions from the deepwater Gulf of Mexico and Tight Oil. Tight oil accounted for 27 billion barrels (56% of total) in 2022.

Figure 1. U.S. proved oil reserves reached a new record in 2022.
Reserves declined from 1969 to 2006 then increased with deepwater Gulf of Mexico and Tight Oil 
Source: EIA & Labyrinth Consulting Services
Figure 1. U.S. proved oil reserves reached a new record in 2022.
Reserves declined from 1969 to 2006 then increased with deepwater Gulf of Mexico and Tight Oil
Source: EIA & Labyrinth Consulting Services

The U.S. does not, however, have world-class oil reserves. It’s a respectable, second-tier reserve holder similar to Libya. U.S. reserves are about half of Russia’s, one-third of Iraq’s, & about one-fifth of Iran’s & Saudi Arabia’s (Figure 2). It holds roughly 3% of the world’s reserves compared to Iraq’s 9%, Iran’s 12% and Saudi Arabia’s 15%.

Figure 2. The United States is a respectable, second-tier world oil reserve holder similar to Libya.
Reserves are about half of Russia's, 1/3 of Iraq's, & about 1/5 of Iran's & Saudi Arabia's.
Source:  EIA &  Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc.
Figure 2. The United States is a respectable, second-tier world oil reserve holder similar to Libya.
Reserves are about half of Russia’s, 1/3 of Iraq’s, & about 1/5 of Iran’s & Saudi Arabia’s.
Source: EIA & Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc.

Countries in the Persian Gulf have almost half of the world’s oil, and 42% of the worlds remaining proved reserves are in just four countries: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq and the United Arab Emirates. Iraq is now a vassal state of Iran—an enemy of the U.S.—and, together, they have more than 20% of the oil that’s left. Add Russia and our principal enemies control a quarter of the world’s oil.

Those are terrible odds. U.S. foreign policy after World War II was founded on oil security from the Middle East. The last four energy-blind U.S. presidents managed to undo that. One of those two will be the next president of the United States.

Most people know that the wars in Ukraine and in the Middle East are serious but think of them in parochial terms—that they developed out of long-standing feuds between people who have always been at each other’s throats.

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

The Permian Shrugs Off Below-Zero Natural Gas Prices in Texas

The Permian Shrugs Off Below-Zero Natural Gas Prices in Texas

  • Natural gas prices at the Waha hub slumped to a negative value of -$2.00 per MMBtu in April.
  • Major pipeline operators in the Permian basin haven’t yet seen any effect of the negative gas prices at the Waha hub in West Texas on activity.
  • In the oil rig basins, producers aren’t rushing to boost oil production, but aren’t scaling back production, either.
Permian

Permian producers are not shutting in oil wells with associated natural gas despite the fact that the Texas regional gas price has been stuck at below-zero levels since early March.

Major pipeline operators in the Permian basin haven’t yet seen any effect of the negative gas prices at the Waha hub in West Texas on activity as producers are look to maximize oil realizations at West Texas Intermediate crude prices at above $80 per barrel.

But the U.S. natural gas benchmark, Henry Hub, has been depressed below $2.00 per million British thermal units (MMBtu) since early February due to weak winter demand amid milder weather, record output at the end of 2023, and higher-than-average natural gas stocks.

Natural gas prices at the Waha hub slumped to a negative value of -$2.00 per MMBtu in April as the recent rise in oil prices prompted producers to bring drilled but uncompleted wells online. The Waha hub prices remained below zero for most of March and April amid high production and not enough takeaway capacity.

The price at the Waha Hub rose by $1.25 in the latest reporting week, from -$1.18/MMBtu to $0.07/MMBtu on April 24, only the second day the price was above zero since April 1, per EIA data.

The negative Waha gas prices and the supply glut are creating a problem for Permian producers regarding how they should dispose of part of the excess natural gas output.

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

Ukrainian Drones Hit Major Rosneft Refinery in Russia

Ukrainian Drones Hit Major Rosneft Refinery in Russia

Just as Russia had started to bring back some refinery capacity damaged by Ukrainian drone attacks earlier this year, a new wave of drone attacks hit a major refinery owned by Rosneft, for a second time.

Rosneft’s Ryazan refinery southeast of Moscow caught fire after the overnight drone attack, an anonymous Ukrainian military source with knowledge of the situation told Bloomberg News on Wednesday.

The refinery in the region of Ryazan, whose main city of the same name is some 120 miles southeast of Moscow, was first attacked by drones in the middle of March. The first attack also led to a fire.

This year, Ukraine has stepped up attacks on oil refineries in Russia, which have reduced Russian refining capacity, and, reportedly, have the White House concerned about rising international prices.

The United States has repeatedly urged Ukraine to halt its drone attacks on Russian oil refineries due to Washington’s assessment that the strikes could lead to Russian retaliation and push up global oil prices, the Financial Times reported in March, citing sources familiar with the exchange.

As of mid-April, Russia had brought back online some oil refining units, reducing the capacity taken offline by Ukrainian drone hits to around 10%, from 14% at the end of March.

The refining capacity in Russia that was offline due to drone attacks was estimated by Reuters in mid-April at around 660,000 barrels per day (bpd), compared to 907,000 bpd offline at the end of March.

Russia said in early April it can repair all damaged units within two months.

Russia’s Energy Minister Nikolai Shulginov said that all damaged refineries in the country would be restarted by the beginning of June.

“Repairs are underway at the refineries. We plan to re-launch a number of refineries after repairs in April-May, possibly before the beginning of June,” Russian news agency Interfax quoted Shulginov as saying.

“All facilities that were damaged will be re-commissioned,” the minister added.

Build It, And The Wind Won’t Come

Build It, And The Wind Won’t Come

Weather-dependent generation sources are…weather dependent: Last year, despite adding 6.2 GW of new capacity, U.S. wind production dropped by 2.1%.

Damaged wind turbines at the Punta Lima wind project, Naguabo, Puerto Rico, 2018. Photo: Wikipedia.

Three years ago, in the wake of Winter Storm Uri, the alt-energy lobby and their many allies in the media made sure not to blame wind energy for the Texas blackouts. The American Clean Power Association (2021 revenue: $32.1 million) declared frozen wind turbines “did not cause the Texas power outages” because they were “not the primary cause of the blackouts. Most of the power that went offline was powered by gas or coal.”

NPR parroted that line, claiming, “Blaming wind and solar is a political move.” The Texas Tribune said it was wrong to blame alt-energy after Winter Storm Uri because “wind power was expected to make up only a fraction of what the state had planned for during the winter.” The outlet also quoted one academic who said that natural gas was “failing in the most spectacular fashion right now.” Texas Tribune went on to explain, “Only 7% of ERCOT’s forecasted winter capacity, or 6 gigawatts, was expected to come from various wind power sources across the state.”

In other words, there was no reason to expect the 33 GW of wind capacity that Texas had to deliver because, you know, no one expected wind energy to produce much power. Expectations? Mr. October? Playoff Jamal? Who needs them?

But what happens when you build massive amounts of wind energy capacity and it doesn’t deliver — not for a day or a week, but for six months, or even an entire year? T…

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

The Four Key Reasons Why The U.S. Will Never Stop Targeting Russia’s LNG Sector

The Four Key Reasons Why The U.S. Will Never Stop Targeting Russia’s LNG Sector

  • LNG has become the most important swing energy source in an increasingly insecure world.
  • Energy exports remain the foundation stone of Russia’s essentially petro-economy.
  • Russia’s LNG industry is closely associated in Russia with President Vladimir Putin personally.
Arctic oil and gas

Perhaps even more than its targeting of Russian oil exports, the U.S. has been laser-focused on its liquefied natural gas (LNG) sector as they key area it wants to effectively destroy over the long term. Last week’s suspension of Russia’s flagship Arctic LNG-2 project by lead operator Novatek is the latest of Washington’s trophies in this regard, but it is very unlikely to be the last. As U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Energy Resources Geoffrey Pyatt said on 24 April: “[Novatek] has recently had to suspend production at its Arctic LNG-2 liquefaction facility, in part because of sanctions that the Biden administration has led.” He added: “We’re going to keep tightening the screws […]  We’re going to continue to designate a broad range of entities involved in development of other key energy projects, future energy projects as well, and associated infrastructure including the Vostok Oil Project, the Ust Luga LNG Terminal, and the Yakutia Gas Project.” So, why is the U.S. so concerned about Russia’s LNG sector?

The first of four key reasons is that LNG has become the most important swing energy source in an increasingly insecure world. Unlike oil or gas that is transported through pipelines, LNG does not require years and vast expenses to build out a complex infrastructure before it is ready to transport anywhere. Once gas has been converted to LNG, it can be shipped and moved anywhere within a matter of days and bought reliably either through short- or long-term contracts or immediately in the spot market…

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

The Dark Origins of the Davos’ Great Reset

Important to understand is that there is not one single new or original idea in Klaus Schwab’s so-called Great Reset agenda for the world. Nor is his Fourth Industrial Revolution agenda his or his claim to having invented the notion of Stakeholder Capitalism a product of Schwab.

Klaus Schwab is little more than a slick PR agent for a global technocratic agenda, a corporatist unity of corporate power with government, including the UN, an agenda whose origins go back to the beginning of the 1970s, and even earlier.  The Davos Great reset is merely an updated blueprint for a global dystopian dictatorship under UN control that has been decades in development. The key actors were David Rockefeller and his protégé, Maurice Strong.

In the beginning of the 1970s, there was arguably no one person more influential in world politics than the late David Rockefeller, then largely known as chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank.

Creating the new paradigm

At the end of the 1960s and into the early 1970s, the international circles directly tied to David Rockefeller launched a dazzling array of elite organizations and think tanks. These included

The Club of Rome;

the 1001: A Nature Trust, tied to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF);

the Stockholm United Nations Earth Day conference;

the MIT-authored study, Limits to Growth;

and David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission.

Club of Rome

In 1968 David Rockefeller founded a neo-Malthusian think tank, The Club of Rome, along with Aurelio Peccei and Alexander King. Aurelio Peccei, was a senior manager of the Fiat car company, owned by the powerful Italian Agnelli family…

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

Notes from the edge of civilization: Apr. 28, 2024

Notes from the edge of civilization: Apr. 28, 2024

No one wants EVs, but governments keep subsidizing them; Canada’s economy is being zombified; Education — higher and otherwise — is still woke, but not awake; and, cursive as cure.

TRUTH IN ADVERTISING: Even Ford’s own marketing materials admit that EVs are a product “drivers really want… but just don’t know it yet.”

Last week Ford announced its electric vehicle (EV) division, known as Model e, lost $1.3 billion in the first quarter of 2024. That translates to a loss of $132,000 per vehicle for the 10,000 units the company managed to sell. Ford anticipates the losses will continue to mount for the rest of the year, with a projected annual loss of $5 billion.

Image

The world’s largest EV maker, Tesla, is also hemorrhaging profits. The company’s adjusted earnings for the first quarter fell by 48%, underperforming even the lowered expectations set by most Wall Street analysts.

But governments are still pouring in massive amounts of taxpayer dollars to subsidize a product that consumers don’t want to buy.

On Thursday, Canada announced a $5 billion corporate welfare package for Honda to build an EV battery plant and manufacture EVs in Ontario. When Justin Trudeau released a video about the new deal on X over the weekend, the comments were not kind:

DeTocqueville14: You bribing Honda with money stolen from taxpayers isn’t them betting on you.

govt_corrupt: Justin Trudeau bribes Honda. Buys 1k jobs for $5B and bets on an industry with declining sales and rising inventories. Govt ‘investing’ at its finest…

jpkiekens: 5 million $ per job subsidy for an industry plagued with a huge oversupply of vehicles and with insufficient electric energy supply in most provinces. Bravo. It’s genuine theatre. But a very bad play.

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

China can’t quit coal by 2040, researchers say, despite global climate goals

China can’t quit coal by 2040, researchers say, despite global climate goals

General view of a coal mine in Yulin city, Shaanxi
A general view of a coal mine during a Huawei-organised media tour, in Yulin city, Shaanxi province, China April 24, 2023. REUTERS/Tingshu Wang Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab
BEIJING, April 23 (Reuters) – China’s coal consumption will fall by just one-third by 2040, according to a report by a European consultancy published on Tuesday, threatening climate targets that call for phasing out much of global coal use by 2040.
The International Energy Agency has said that global coal power capacity has to be eliminated by 2040 to keep average global temperature rises within the key threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit).
However, Norwegian risk assessment firm DNV said in its report that its findings indicate China’s coal consumption – the world’s biggest – will see a “minor uptick” in the next two years and then fall by one-third by 2040, ending up at around 25% of its peak in 2050.
The findings underscore China’s outlook on fossil fuels. In September, former climate envoy Xie Zhenhua told the COP28 climate talks that it would be “unrealistic to completely phase out fossil fuel energy”.
China will continue using coal despite a massive ramp-up in renewable generation, which will make up 88% of China’s power generation mix in 2050, the report predicts.
China approved another 114GW of coal power plants last year, up 10% from 2022, and the iron and steel sectors are on track to overtake power as the biggest consumers of coal by mid-century. Coal-to-chemicals will also make up a significant share of the remaining demand, according to the report.
Decarbonisation of the steel sector through new methods such as cleaner electric arc furnace technology is lagging in China, research has shown.
Natural gas consumption will stay part of the energy mix with consumption falling only 2% from 2022 levels by 2050, the report said.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Kazakhstan’s Oil Flows to Germany Threatened as Russia Demands Transit Fees

Kazakhstan’s Oil Flows to Germany Threatened as Russia Demands Transit Fees

Russian pipeline operator Transneft has warned Kazakhstan’s oil companies that ship crude to Germany via Transneft’s Druzhba pipeline that the customers of the Kazakh firms have until June to pay for metering services or risk a halt to supplies, trading sources told Reuters on Thursday.

In early 2023, as Russian crude flows via the Druzhba pipeline dropped off, crude oil from Kazakhstan started flowing via the Russian pipeline network to Poland for further delivery to Germany.

In December 2022, Kazakhstan’s oil pipeline operator KazTransOil applied to transport a total of 1.2 million tons of Kazakh crude oil through Transneft’s system of trunk oil pipelines in the direction of the Adamova Zastava point for further delivery to Germany.

Meanwhile, crude oil deliveries from Russia to Poland were suspended.

The northern leg of the Druzhba oil pipeline system which connects Germany and Poland via Belarus, is now used for Kazakhstan’s oil exports for the Schwedt refinery. Schwedt is the fourth-largest refinery in Germany and it gets its oil from the Druzhba oil pipeline. The refinery supplies 90% of the fuel needs of Germany’s capital city Berlin.

Now the Russian pipeline monopoly Transneft has recently told Kazakh suppliers that Polish state pipeline operator PERN has until June to pay for metering services at its Adamowo base on the Polish-Belarussian border, according to Reuters’ trading sources. The current service contract is due to expire on June 5, one of these sources said.

The use of the Druzhba pipeline and the Russian Black Sea ports for oil exports highlights the dependence of Kazakhstan’s oil supply on Russia.

Most of Kazakhstan’s crude oil exports are currently being handled by the network of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC). The CPC pipeline runs from the Caspian coast in northwest Kazakhstan to the Novorossiysk port on Russia’s Black Sea coast and carries 80% of Kazakh crude exports.

Big Oil’s Dangerous Radioactive Secret

DeSmog writer Justin Nobel’s new book explores how workers bear the brunt of the oil and gas industry’s hidden contaminated waste.
Left, Petroleum 238 cover. Credit: Sabrina Bedford, design; Julie Dermansky, photo. Right, author Justin Nobel. Credit: Karen LeBlanc.

In Paris, France, there are fine cafés and famous landmarks. But what nobody really knows is at the other end of a building known as Le V, on the northeast side of the city, is a portal that leads to a secret pile of fracking waste from the woods of West Virginia. A lot more comes to the surface at an oil and gas well than just the oil and gas, including billions of pounds of waste every day across the U.S., much of it toxic and radioactive. My journey into this topic started when an Ohio community organizer told me someone made a liquid deicer out of radioactive oilfield waste for home driveways and patios, which was supposedly “Safe for Pets” and had been selling at Lowe’s. As you will see, this indeed was the case. Unraveling how that came to be turned into a 20-month Rolling Stone magazine investigation, which won an award with the National Association of Science Writers, and an entire set of shocking DeSmog investigations. And, eventually, it all became this book, Petroleum 238: Big Oil’s Dangerous Secret and the Grassroots Fight to Stop It — available here on Amazonhere on Bookshop, or it can be ordered at any local bookstore.

It almost doesn’t seem real, and you might deny it. But really all that has happened here is a powerful industry has spread harms across the land, its people, and more so than anyone, their very own workers, and did what they could to make sure no one ever put all the pieces together. And no one ever has…

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

The Politics and Policy of a National Climate Emergency Declaration

The Politics and Policy of a National Climate Emergency Declaration

If climate and energy policy matter, then here are the three questions to ask instead

Yesterday, Bloomberg reported that the Biden Administration is once again considering declaring a national “climate emergency,” explaining that such a declaration could be used to “halt [fossil fuel] exports, drilling.” Today, I have extensively updated a 2022 piece I wrote on such a declaration. The consideration of such a declaration reveals a stark divergence between election-year politics and effective climate and energy policies. Rather than asking whether a “climate emergency” declaration makes sense, I recommend the three other questions to ask instead. Comments welcomed!

“A significant feature of American government during the last fifteen years is the expansion of governmental activity on the basis of emergency.” That is the opening line in a 1949 academic paper on “Emergencies and the Presidency.” The role of the president in declaring a state of emergency to achieve policy goals has been a policy issue that dates back at least to President Abraham Lincoln.

Today, President Biden is once again being called upon by his supporters to declare a national emergency on climate change. Rather than argue for or against it, in this post I’m going to explain the history of such declarations, what recent experience says about their effectiveness in policy, and suggest the three questions we should be asking instead.

A national emergency declaration may be a political end, but it is also supposed to be a policy means — a mechanism intended to achieve certain outcomes in the national interest. Apart from the politics of using an emergency declaration to signal affinity with certain political interests, below I recommend the policy questions that we should be asking instead.

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

What did they expect?

What did they expect?

My house backs on to a railway line which is now exclusively for passenger trains.  It wasn’t always this way though.  There was a time when the relative peace was broken six times a day by the roar of freight trains heading up the Rhymney Valley.  Their destination was the coal washery at Cwmbargoed, from where they would ferry thousands of tonnes of coal per journey to the power station in Aberthaw and the steel works in Port Talbot.  Aberthaw power station closed at the end of March 2020.  And, on 23 February this year, the last coal train made its way down the valley, taking a last load of coal to Port Talbot.  Of the three, that left Port Talbot steelworks the only one still operating… although, and not for unconnected reasons, Port Talbot’s days were also numbered.

Whether Britain should still have been mining Welsh coal rather depends upon how favourable you are to exporting your carbon emissions to someone else’s country.  After all – and despite expensive experimental attempts at hydrogen steel production – if you want to make virgin steel – for example if you had a plan to build and operate thousands of wind turbines – you have to use coal.  That being the case, the least environmentally harmful approach would be to source it from a huge deposit 25 miles away rather than shipping it thousands of miles from Brazil, China, or Kazakhstan.

This, no doubt, was why the otherwise green-leaning Blair government gave the approval for a vast opencast mine just outside Merthyr Tydfil.  As George Monbiot complained at the time:

“The diggers at Ffos-y-fran, on the outskirts of Merthyr Tydfil, are set to excavate 1,000 acres of land to a depth of 600ft.  There has never been a hole quite like it in Britain, and our government’s climate change policies are about to fall into it.”

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

Designing Collective Security | Olivia Lazard

Designing Collective Security | Olivia Lazard

Navigating existential crisis in a time of political and social upheaval

We’re breaking all kinds of records at the moment: cities are boiling at 62C, ocean temperatures are literally off the charts, and governments have increased the global defence budget to an alarming $2440 billion.

War costs life, and not just human life. The environmental impacts of war are colossal, with one study already showing that the first few months of Israel’s assault on Gaza emitted more carbon dioxide than 20 climate-vulnerable nations do in one year. Our ecosystems are at their breaking point, with six of nine planetary boundaries crossed. We need global collaboration to commit the huge systems overhaul necessary to survive the planetary crises and mitigate the catastrophic decisions of the last centuries.

Olivia Lazard, environmental peacemaker and research fellow at Carnegie Europe, joins me to discuss just how complex that task is, detailing the five steps of the Anthropocene and how violence increases at each step. We discuss these legacy systems of extraction and violence and how they are embedded into decisions being made around A.I., creating security risks in a resource-scarce world. We also cover the dematerialisation of our economies, the myths that blind us to energy and materials, before discussing the balance of power tipping our planet and human systems further into crisis.

Olduvai IV: Courage
Click on image to read excerpts

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Click on image to purchase @ FriesenPress