Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on June 25, 2014 at 4:40pm

Do you have a question about energy?

Do you suffer from insomnia?

Here is where to find the answers ....

http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/energy-economics/sta...

Click the hot button titled: 'Statistical Review 2014' and you will likely find the answer to your question and will likely solve your problem with insomnia.

The Brits may have problems in drilling wells (remember Macondo?) .... but they are very good at accumulating statistics.

All IMHO,

                 JS

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on June 26, 2014 at 4:57am

Estimated amount of gas in storage at end of 2014 injection season = 3674 bcf; totally full storage would be in the vicinity of 4000 bcf. The average maximum amount stored over the past five years = 3858 bcf.

This morning the EIA released the Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report for the past week:

http://ir.eia.gov/ngs/ngs.html.

I have updated my calculations based on the above additional data.

A month ago, a highly respected colleague pointed out the following:

“Production is up 1.5 bcfd in the last month, and 7 bcfd year over year. That is 2.3 TCF as a yearly rate increase.”

It is not only the Gas Shales who contribute to NG production; the highly successful Oil Shales have contributed a lot of associated NG.

Taking the above to heart, I went through a ‘back of the envelope’ calculation.

7 bcfd x 7 days/week = 49 bcf/week

Robing my historical statistics from the hallowed AmericanOilman.com website (click on the ‘hot button’ labeled: AmericanOilman Gas Storage):

Looking at the first ten weeks of the injection season – year 2013 versus year 2014:

Calendar Week 16  31 bcf/49 bcf  difference = +18 bcf 

Calendar Week 17  30 bcf/82 bcf  difference = +52 bcf  

Calendar Week 18  43 bcf/74 bcf difference = +31 bcf

Calendar Week 19  88 bcf/105 bcf  difference = + 17 bcf 

Calendar Week 20  99 bcf/106 bcf  difference = +7 bcf

Calendar Week 21  89 bcf/114 bcf  difference = +25 bcf

Calendar Week 22  88 bcf/119 bcf  difference = +31 bcf

Calendar Week 23  111 bcf/107 bcf  difference = -4 bcf

Calendar Week 24  95 bcf/113 bcf  difference = +18 bcf

Calendar Week 25  91 bcf/110 bcf  difference = +19 bcf

Average increase in injections year over year for the past five weeks = 214/10 = 21.4 bcf/week (3.06 bcfd).

The above would suggest that approximately ½ of the additional (year over year) production is currently making it back into the ground as stored natural gas. (as opposed to increased demand from switching to NG for electrical generation and for increased use of NG for industrial applications).  Granted, this is a very simplistic calculation (ignoring weather, short sampling period, etc.); but it is in the least suggestive of what might eventually constitute reality. Making any predictions based on ten samples is hazardous; as we are only about 1/3^rd of the way through the injection season..

Pushing the above simplistic calculation as far as possible:

Possibly 21 more weeks of injection x an additional 21.4 bcf/week injected = an additional 449 bcf potentially injected in 2014 versus 2013.

Weeks 25 – 46 injected in 2013 = (3834 bcf – 2438 bcf) = 1396 bcf  injected in last 22 weeks of 2013 injection season (an average of 63.45 bcf/week).

Current (2014) week 25 storage = 1829 bcf

Potential amount of gas in storage at end of 2014 injection season = 1829 bcf + 1396 bcf + 449 bcf = 3674 bcf

Fall of 2013, we went into winter with 3834 bcf in storage (end of week 46).

If the above holds true (a big if); we should make it through the Winter of 2014-2015, warm and toasty.

If the above holds true (a big if); there will be little likelihood of upward pressure on the price of Natural Gas. If the above holds true (a big if); there will be little likelihood of significant downward pressure on the price of Natural Gas. What I have so easily calculated is doubtless not lost on the likes of Goldman Sachs (and the other Banksters); I do not listen to what they say … I studiously watch what they do.

When making any predictions, I am always fearful of the following: risks associated with extrapolation (I much prefer interpolation, it has treated me more kindly), assumption that it won’t be significantly different this time (particularly with regards to weather), no acceleration in outside demand (industrial, additional exports to eastern Canada and Mexico, switching from coal to NG),  …………. and importantly, the constant specter of some Black Swan event (there are a number of unknown and unpredictable variables which could shortly negate all of the above; making it fodder for the recycling bin).

 

Consider all the above to be worth every penny you paid for it.

 

JS

 

 

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on June 26, 2014 at 7:35am

Written by Sumit Roy  |

June 26, 2014

NatGas Poised To Test $4.25 As Traders Await Summer Heat

Natural gas inventories rose by 110 bcf last week, above expectations

Source: http://www.hardassetsinvestor.com/features/6003-natgas-poised-to-te...

Natural gas was last trading down by close to 2 percent to $4.46/mmbtu after the Energy Information Administration reported that operators injected 110 billion cubic feet into storage last week, above the 102 to 108 bcf most analysts were expecting.

The latest injection was above last year’s build of 95 bcf and above the five-year average build of 85 bcf.

 

 

In turn, inventories now stand at 1,829 bcf, which is 704 bcf below the year-ago level and 816 bcf below the five-year average (calculated using a slightly different methodology than the EIA).

 

 

 

 

The weather last week was close to seasonal norms.

According to the Edison Electric Institute, utilities generated 83,790 GWh in the week ending June 21, up 2.6 percent from a year ago.

 

 

Looking forward, the NOAA’s 6- to 10-day outlook calls for warmer-than-normal temperatures across the West and East, and cooler-than-normal temperatures for Texas.

NOAA 6- TO 10-DAY OUTLOOK

 

 

Meanwhile, Baker Hughes reported that the number of rigs drilling for natural gas in the U.S. rose by one to 311 last week.

Natural Gas Rig Count

 

Natural Gas

 

Bottom Line: The latest inventory data from the EIA were neutral, as the inventory deficit against the five-year average fell from 841 to 816 bcf and the deficit against last year fell from 719 to 704 bcf.

Since the end of winter, natural gas has been range-bound, with support near $4.25/mmbtu and resistance near $4.80. Prices look poised to challenge the bottom end of that range in the short term. Whether that level holds will depend on whether the rate of injections slows materially from here as summer temperatures heat up in July and August.

We’ve seen triple-digit injections in each of the past seven weeks. Yet injections have only averaged 15 bcf (~2 bcf/d) above last year during that period.

Going forward, the year-over-year comparisons will become much more difficult. For example, the inventory builds from last year for the end of June through the end of July were 72, 82, 58, 41, and 59.Thus, this year's injections must decline significantly from current triple-digit levels to prevent a big decrease in the year-over-year inventory surplus.

If injections do indeed decline notably, prices may bounce off the $4.25 support level. Otherwise, an eventual decline to $4 may be in the cards.

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on June 27, 2014 at 2:14pm

Source: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/06/27/uk-usa-crude-exports-idUKK...

Exclusive - Loophole for condensate exports may apply to other U.S. crudes -sources

By Timothy Gardner and Kristen Hays

Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:45am BST

An oil refinery is seen in Louisiana in a file photo.

Credit: Reuters/Shannon Stapleton

(Reuters) - The U.S. decision allowing minimally processed super-light oil known as condensate to be freely exported may open the door to doing the same with other types of crude too, according to industry and government sources who have reviewed the ruling.

This view, which has not been previously reported, will add to intense speculation over how much of the U.S. shale oil boom will reach overseas markets and how quickly loopholes will be opened in the 40-year-old ban on exporting domestic crude.

The Department of Commerce determined this week that two companies that handle condensate can export it after treatment by so-called stabilizers, which use heat to shave off volatile natural gas liquids and remove contaminants such as hydrogen sulfide in order to meet pipeline specifications.

Texas-based companies Pioneer Natural Resources and Enterprise Product Partners had sought clarity from the government over whether stabilized condensate could be exported as a petroleum product without a special license, which is needed to export unprocessed domestic crude.

The Commerce Department said yes.

But importantly, sources in industry and government emphasized, that determination just focussed on how crude is treated. That means other types of crude that undergo similar minimal processing could potentially be exported as well.

"Under the definition of crude oil, the API level doesn't matter," a Commerce Department source said, referring to the American Petroleum Institute's scale for measuring oil’s density.

Heavy crude like that in Venezuela or Canada would be a 22 on the scale, while London’s Brent is about a 38 and typical West Texas Intermediate produced in the nation’s midsection generally is around 40. Ultra-light condensate usually rates 50 or higher.

CHANGING LANDSCAPE

U.S. law has traditionally defined processed oil as having passed through distillation towers, key pieces of refinery equipment that turn crude oil into finished products.

But the U.S. oil boom has created a glut of light oil and condensate that Gulf Coast refineries, largely built to run heavy crudes, have been unable to fully absorb.

Some companies have responded by building so-called splitters that turn condensate into naphthas and distillates that can be exported or sold domestically.

They have also expanded stabilizers.

Stabilizers, originally used to ensure crude and condensate meet pipeline specifications, now fall into the same rubric as splitters and distillation towers, according to the Commerce Department's determination.

"We always knew that if it ran through a simple distillation unit or a splitter it’s a (refined) product. This just moved it one step down that a stabilizer that extracts (liquefied petroleum gases) is equivalent to that," said John Auers, a refining consultant with Turner & Mason, an energy consultancy in Dallas. "It’s a more liberal definition of what distillation is."

Large U.S. oil producers in North Dakota’s Bakken shale and Pennsylvania’s Marcellus shale fields told Reuters they had suspected for months that they would be able to export crude oil or condensate (after minimal processing), but resisted making such a move due in part to the ambiguity then surrounding Commerce Department’s public statements on the issues.

“It looked to us that it was a legitimate export if you take condensate and put it through a stabilizer,” said one source, who declined to be named, citing the sensitivity of discussions with regulators. “The ruling itself wasn’t a surprise.”

Quantum Energy Inc, a U.S. energy venture, said on Friday it plans to build a network of stabilizers and refining equipment that would produce fuel fit for export from North Dakota's Bakken oil patch, which churns out light crudes.

(Reporting by Timothy Gardner in Washington and Kristen Hays in Houston; Editing by Mohammad Zargham)

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on June 30, 2014 at 6:01pm

Source: http://theweek.com/article/index/263786/russias-quiet-war-against-e...

Russia's quiet war against European fracking

Environmentalists trying to block shale gas exploration across Europe are unknowingly helping Putin maintain his energy leverage over the continent

By Keith Johnson, Foreign Policy | June 30, 2014

 

Tweet

inShare2

8

Putin benefits from worries about fracking. (AP Photo/Vasily Maximov, Pool)

Russia is trying to maintain its energy stranglehold over Europe by backing movements across the continent to demonize fracking, the head of NATO alleged. It is part of Russia's broader use of soft power and covert means to complement its more overt efforts to reassert influence in Europe and keep countries there from developing alternatives to an energy addiction worth $100 million a day to Moscow.

"I have met allies who can report that Russia, as part of their sophisticated information and disinformation operations, engage actively with so-called non-government organizations — environmental organizations working against shale gas — obviously to maintain European dependence on imported Russian gas," NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen said after a Chatham House speech.

NATO officials said Rasmussen's remarks were meant to underscore NATO's growing unease with Europe's energy security situation. "Clearly, it is in the interest of all NATO allies to be able to have adequate energy supplies. We share a concern by some allies that Russia could try to obstruct possible projects on shale gas exploration in Europe in order to maintain Europe's reliance on Russian gas," a NATO official told Foreign Policy.

Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, has unleashed an energy boom in the United States. But the practice, which is designed to tap previously unreachable stores of natural gas by injecting a chemical cocktail at high pressure to break apart shale formations deep underground, also generates plenty of environmental opposition. Critics say fracking can poison underground stores of drinking water.

In Europe, that opposition is particularly fierce, both because environmental groups have more political power than in the United States and because higher population densities magnify the possible damaging effects of the drilling practice. Some countries have banned fracking outright; others, including France and Germany, have imposed onerous regulations that effectively make the practice illegal, though they are reconsidering fracking in light of the standoff with Russia over Ukraine.

Russian energy firms and officials, as well as Kremlin-controlled media, have lambasted fracking on environmental grounds for years. Top Gazprom officials and even Russian President Vladimir Putin have attacked the technology, which, if adopted, could ease Europe's dependence on Russian gas.

But one thing has for years puzzled energy experts: Well-organized and well-funded environmental opposition to fracking in Europe sprang up suddenly in countries such as Bulgaria and Ukraine, which had shown little prior concern for the environment but which are heavily dependent on Russia for energy supplies. Similar movements have also targeted Europe's plans to build pipelines that would offer an alternative to reliance on Moscow.

"It's very concrete; it relates to both opposition to shale and also trying to block any alternative pipelines with environmental challenges," said Brenda Shaffer, an energy expert at Georgetown University. "There is a lot of evidence here; countries like Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine being at the vanguard of the environmental movement is enough for it to be conspicuous," she said.

Bucharest, Romania: Environmental activists protest fracking. | (BOGDAN CRISTEL/Reuters/Corbis)

Bulgaria's anti-shale movement is particularly telling. The country initially embraced fracking as a way to develop its own energy resources and reduce reliance on Russia, even signing an exploration deal with Chevron in 2011. But then came an eruption of seemingly grassroots environmental protests and a televised blitz against fracking. In early 2012, the government reversed course and banned the practice.

Researchers who've worked on the ground in Central and Eastern Europe say there is plenty of anecdotal evidence, if no smoking guns, of Russian financial support for some environmental groups that have recently mobilized opposition to shale gas development.

In Ukraine, for example, anti-fracking movements became more organized and better funded just as the government worked to finalize shale gas deals with Western energy firms, officials there say. In Lithuania, "exactly the same thing is happening," said a government official, who described the mushrooming of anti-shale billboards and websites there as "an integrated, strategic communications campaign." As in Bulgaria, the well-funded groups organized screenings of Gasland to galvanize opposition to fracking.

"All of a sudden, in societies that never did grassroots organization very well, you saw all these NGOs well-funded, popping up, and causing well-organized protests," said Mihaela Carstei, an energy and environment analyst at the Atlantic Council.

To be sure, much of Europe's anti-fracking movement is motivated by genuine environmental concerns, just as in the United States; much of that opposition was catalyzed by the controversial 2010 anti-shale documentary Gasland. There are fears about fracking's effect on groundwater and the link between fracking and increased seismic activity. France, for instance, banned fracking before Bulgaria. And despite the Ukraine crisis and the rumblings of pro-fracking sentiment from some senior government officials, which could open the door to France rethinking the ban, fracking is still off the table there for now. Environmental groups such as Greenpeace scoff at the NATO chief's allegations, saying that they oppose fracking for sound environmental reasons. What's more, there's little love lost between Greenpeace and Russia, because Moscow detained dozens of the group's green activists last year.

"I wouldn't underestimate the role that Russia plays in shale gas in Europe, but I wouldn't overestimate it, either," said Andreas Goldthau, an energy expert at Harvard University's Belfer Center who has extensively researched shale gas policies in Europe. "Overall, particularly in Bulgaria and Romania, the causes of shale's problems are varied; it's not only the Russians coming in and trying to start protests."

Ultimately, Russia's efforts to derail Europe's alternative pipeline projects, more than its possible support for anti-fracking groups, represent a more immediate threat to Europe's efforts to diversify its energy supplies, Shaffer said.

"These rival projects are even more of a threat than fracking because shale gas will take a long time to develop, but these projects will soon bring gas to Europe; they are practical and concrete," she said.

Permalink Reply by searcherone on July 1, 2014 at 1:43am

As always Jack a very informative article.   IMHO natural resources  or financial gain are always  the root of conflict between nations or groups of people within a nation.  

Permalink Reply by gary smith on July 4, 2014 at 5:40am

are always?  the largest contributor to violence in this world has nothing to do with natural resources or financial gain. islam is on the march . some may try to connect it's savagery with the worlds need for oil. if the headcutters take over there will be no oil pumped,other than what they need to buy weapons to kill infidels.

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 1, 2014 at 4:27pm

Source: http://www.ogj.com/articles/2014/06/us-needs-ethane-export-capacity...

ICF: US needs ethane export capacity to sustain shale gas boom

HOUSTON, June 25

06/25/2014

By Rachael Seeley
OGJ Special Projects

Greater investment in infrastructure is needed to ensure that rising NGL production in the US can reach international markets. Without it, a glut will form, placing downward pressure on prices and eroding the economics of shale gas drilling.

This was the message conveyed at a breakfast presentation hosted by ICF International Inc. on June 25 in Houston.

The NGL industry in the US is very robust and is expected to stay that way for years to come with a caveat of risk, said Greg Hopper, vice-president, ICF International.

An unprecedented spread between oil and natural gas prices in the US has made NGL more valuable than dry gas, Hopper said. As a result, shale gas drilling in the US and Canada is predominantly focused on liquids-rich areas—notably the Marcellus and Utica shales.

Data from Baker Hughes Inc. show that drilling in dry gas shale plays, like the Barnett and Haynesville, has dropped off sharply in recent years due to weak US gas prices.

Hopper said NGL production is propping up the economics of shale gas production. However, there is uncertainty surrounding how the county’s growing supply of NGL will connect to markets. “The good news is we have lots of supply,” the bad news is right now we need more infrastructure, Hopper said.

The two biggest components of NGL are propane and ethane, Hopper said. An export market is already in place for US propane. US Energy Information Administration data show propane exports doubled in the last 2 years, rising from 151,000 b/d in March 2012 to 333,000 b/d in March 2014.

Conversely, the US lacks the infrastructure to export ethane, and the supply of ethane is increasing faster than US demand.

Peter Fasullo, Envantage Inc., estimates that US ethane extraction capacity increased 69% since 2006 to 1.23 million b/d, and he projects it will reach 2.2 million b/d by 2020. However, in Appalachia, home to the Marcellus shale, 87% of the ethane capable of being recovered was being rejected as of January due to transportation constraints (OGJ, June 2, 2014, p. 82).

Rejected volumes are forced to remain in the pipeline. But, Hopper said, the volume of rejected ethane is approaching the limit that the pipeline system can accept. “The question is what to do with the ethane,” he said.

Export capacity is needed to connect ethane to international markets. Otherwise, Hopper said, supplies will back up into the US market and cause prices to fall, eroding the profitability of shale gas projects. In that event, higher dry gas prices would be needed to sustain high levels of wet gas production.

Clearing liquids out of the US market “will be critical,” he said.

Contact Rachael Seeley at rachaels@ogjonline.com.

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 3, 2014 at 3:45pm

Source: http://www.bentekenergy.com//BentekTopStories.aspx?e=3&rpt=89&a...

BENTEK Top Stories

07/03/2014 –
Power Burn Analytic Report

2015 power burn expected to reach all-time highs

Bentek expects 2015 will be a record year for power burn. With US production steadily increasing and new infrastructure being built to deliver gas from supply zones to demand zones, natural gas prices are expected to become more competitive with coal prices. This could lead to a resurgence in power burn demand in regions that are long natural gas. In addition to this, the US Environmental Protection Agency's Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, along with the agency’s newly announced greenhouse gas restrictions, may accelerate coal retirements. These regulations are especially harsh toward coal generators, and with many coal plants approaching the end of their lifetime, power producers may decide to preemptively retire existing coal generators in favor of more efficient gas turbines. The competitiveness of natural gas prices may initially incentivize power producers to burn more gas, but the looming EPA regulations are what potentially keep power burn demand high going forward.

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 4, 2014 at 4:26am

Below is a plot that visually shows the importance of America's Shale Oil production.

The 'red' curve shows World oil production excluding the contribution of America's Shale Oil production;

this curve suggests that with respect to conventional oil production, the World may have reached a 'peak'.

Admittedly, recent events in such countries as Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt and Venezuela are influencing production; never-the-less America's Shale Oil production is becoming an increasingly important contributor to World oil production.

All IMHO,

                    JS

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 4, 2014 at 3:03pm

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-04/u-s-seen-as-biggest-oil-pr...

U.S. Seen as Biggest Oil Producer After Overtaking Saudi Arabia

By Grant Smith Jul 4, 2014 8:56 AM MT

The U.S. will remain the world’s biggest oil producer this year after overtaking Saudi Arabia and Russia as extraction of energy from shale rock spurs the nation’s economic recovery, Bank of America Corp. said.

U.S. production of crude oil, along with liquids separated from natural gas, surpassed all other countries this year with daily output exceeding 11 million barrels in the first quarter, the bank said in a report today. The country became the world’s largest natural gas producer in 2010. The International Energy Agency said in June that the U.S. was the biggest producer of oil and natural gas liquids.

“The U.S. increase in supply is a very meaningful chunk of oil,” Francisco Blanch, the bank’s head of commodities research, said by phone from New York. “The shale boom is playing a key role in the U.S. recovery. If the U.S. didn’t have this energy supply, prices at the pump would be completely unaffordable.”

Oil extraction is soaring at shale formations in Texas and North Dakota as companies split rocks using high-pressure liquid, a process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. The surge in supply combined with restrictions on exporting crude is curbing the price of West Texas Intermediate, America’s oil benchmark. The U.S., the world’s largest oil consumer, still imported an average of 7.5 million barrels a day of crude in April, according to the Department of Energy’s statistical arm.

Photographer: Matthew Staver/Bloomberg

An oil drilling rig stands on the Bakken formation in Watford City, North Dakota. Close

An oil drilling rig stands on the Bakken formation in Watford City, North Dakota.

Photographer: Matthew Staver/Bloomberg

An oil drilling rig stands on the Bakken formation in Watford City, North Dakota.

Surpassing Saudi

U.S. oil output will surge to 13.1 million barrels a day in 2019 and plateau thereafter, according to the IEA, a Paris-based adviser to 29 nations. The country will lose its top-producer ranking at the start of the 2030s, the agency said in its World Energy Outlook in November.

“It’s very likely the U.S. stays as No. 1 producer for the rest of the year” as output is set to increase in the second half, Blanch said. Production growth outside the U.S. has been lower than the bank anticipated, keeping global oil prices high, he said.

Partly as a result of the shale boom, WTI futures on the New York Mercantile Exchange remain at a discount of about $7 a barrel to their European counterpart, the Brent contract on ICE Futures Europe’s London-based exchange. WTI was at $103.74 a barrel as of 4:13 p.m. London time.

Islamist Insurgency

“The shale production story is bigger than Iraqi production, but it hasn’t made the impact on prices you would expect,” said Blanch. “Typically such a large energy supply growth should bring prices lower, but in fact we’re not seeing that because the whole geopolitical situation outside the U.S. is dreadful.”

Territorial gains in northern Iraq by a group calling itself the Islamic State has spurred concerns that oil flows could be disrupted in the second-largest producer in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries after Saudi Arabia. Exports from Libya have been reduced by protests, while Nigeria’s production is crimped by oil theft and sabotage.

Libya will resume exports as soon as possible from two oil ports in the country’s east after taking back control from rebels who blocked crude shipments for the past year, Mohamed Elharari, spokesman for the state-run National Oil Corp., said by phone yesterday from Tripoli.

The U.S. will consolidate its position as the world’s biggest producer in the coming months if returning Libyan supply limits the need for Saudi barrels, said Julian Lee, an oil strategist who writes for Bloomberg News First Word. The observations he makes are his own.

Record Investment

“There’s a very strong linkage between oil production growth, economic growth and wage growth across a range of U.S. states,” Blanch said. Annual investment in oil and gas in the country is at a record $200 billion, reaching 20 percent of the country’s total private fixed-structure spending for the first time, he said.

A U.S. Commerce Department decision to allow the overseas shipment of processed ultra-light oil called condensate has fanned speculation the nation may ease its four-decade ban on most crude exports. Pioneer Natural Resources Co. and Enterprise Products Partners LP will be allowed to export condensate, provided it is first subject to preliminary distillation, the companies said June 25.

The decision was “a positive first step” to dispersing the build-up of crude supply in North America, Bank of America said in a report on June 27. The U.S. could potentially have daily exports of 1 million barrels of crude, including 300,000 of condensate, by the end of the year, according to a June 25 report from Citigroup Inc.

To contact the reporter on this story: Grant Smith in London at gsmith52@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Alaric Nightingale at anightingal1@bloomberg.net James Herron, Randall Hackley

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 4, 2014 at 4:00pm

A belated HAPPY 4th of July.

Have a frac'in good time.

Check this out; if you do not like the tune, turn down the sound and enjoy the graphics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdPOAhBp2Ag&feature=kp

JS

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 16
• Next ›
• Page