AuthorTopic: Fracking Quakes  (Read 3356 times)

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41399
    • View Profile
Fracking Quakes
« on: June 29, 2014, 03:56:34 PM »
Among the various other problems involved with Fracking the Living Shit out of your local neighborhood, it also shakes the dishes around some.

Hey!  Long as these quakes stay in the 3-4 range on the Richter Scale, What, Me Worry?


Please Move Along.  Expert Geologists working for large Fracking Corporations assure us this is perfectly safe.  ::)

RE


The Seismic Link Between Fracking and Earthquakes


    Bryan Walsh @bryanrwalsh

May 1, 2014
Environmentalists fear that fracking could cause more quakes if it expands to California Photo by David McNew/Getty Images
New research indicates that wastewater disposal wells—and sometimes fracking itself—can induce earthquakes
Gas Drilling Earthquakes
More
Geologists: Fracking Likely Cause of Ohio Earthquakes
Exxon Mobil to Reveal Fracking Data
Oklahoma Shakes—Is Fracking to Blame?

Ohio regulators did something last month that had never been done before: they drew a tentative link between shale gas fracking and an increase in local earthquakes. As fracking has grown in the U.S., so have the number of earthquakes—there were more than 100 recorded quakes of magnitude 3.0 or larger each year between 2010 and 2013, compared to an average of 21 per year over the preceding three decades. That includes a sudden increase in seismic activity in usually calm states like Kansas, Oklahoma and Ohio—states that have also seen a rapid increase in oil and gas development. Shale gas and oil development is still growing rapidly—more than eightfold between 2007 and 2o12—but if fracking and drilling can lead to dangerous quakes, America’s homegrown energy revolution might be in for an early end.
More
Mr. Clean It Up: Obama to Nominate Former P&G Head to Lead VA NBC NewsThe Only Thing Better Than Taking A Bath: Adorable Animals Taking Baths Huffington PostTwo-Time Marine Deserter Turns Himself In NBC NewsRadical Rebrand: Violent Militants Declare New Name NBC NewsUruguay eliminates Italy; Did Suarez bite again? Sports Illustrated

But seismologists are only now beginning to grapple with the connection between oil and gas development and earthquakes. New research being presented at the annual meeting of the Seismological Society of America this week shows that wastewater disposal wells—deep holes drilled to hold hundreds of millions of gallons of fluid produced by oil and gas wells—may be changing the stress on existing faults, inducing earthquakes that wouldn’t have happened otherwise. Those quakes can occur tens of miles away from the wells themselves, further than scientists had previously believed. And they can be large as well—researchers have now linked two quakes in 2011 with a magnitude greater than 5.0 to wastewater wells.

“This demonstrates there is a significant hazard,” said Justin Rubinstein, a research geophysicist at the U.S. Geological Survey. “We need to address ongoing seismicity.”

Rubinstein was speaking on a teleconference call with three other seismologists who have been researching how oil and gas development might be able to induce quakes. All of them noted that the vast majority of wastewater disposal sites and oil and gas wells weren’t connected to increased quake activity—which is a good thing, since there are more than 30,000 disposal wells alone scattered around the country. But scientists are still trying to figure out which wells might be capable of inducing strong quakes, though the sheer volume of fluid injected into the ground seems to be the driving factor (that’s one reason why hydraulic fracturing itself rarely seems to induce quakes—around 5 million gallons, or 18.9 million L, of fluid is used in fracking, far less than the amount of fluid that ends up in a disposal well).

“There are so many injection operations throughout much of the U.S. now that even though a small fraction might induce quakes, those quakes have contributed dramatically to the seismic hazard, especially east of the Rockies,” said Arthur McGarr, a USGS scientist working on the subject.

What scientists need to do is understand that seismic hazard—especially if oil and gas development in one area might be capable of inducing quakes that could overwhelm structures that were built for a lower quake risk. That’s especially important given that fracking is taking place in many parts of the country—like Oklahoma or Ohio—that haven’t had much experience with earthquakes, and where both buildings and people likely have a low tolerance to temblors. Right now there’s very little regulation regarding how oil and gas development activities should be adjusted to reduce quake risk—and too little data on the danger altogether.

“There’s a very large gap on policy here,” says Gail Atkinson, a seismologist at the University of Western Ontario. “We need extensive databases on the wells that induce seismicity and the ones that don’t.”

So far the quakes that seem to have been induced by oil and gas activity have shaken up people who live near wells, but haven’t yet caused a lot of damage. But that could change if fracking and drilling move to a part of the country that already has clear existing seismic risks—like California, which has an estimated 15 billion barrels of oil in the Monterey Shale formation that could only be accessed through fracking (limited fracking has been done in California, but only in the lightly populated center of the state). Environmentalists who seek to block shale oil development in the Golden State have seized on fears of fracking-induced quakes, and a bill in the state legislature would establish a moratorium on fracking until research shows it can be done safely.

Regulation is slowly beginning to catch up. In Ohio, officials this month established new guidelines that would allow regulators to halt active hydraulic fracturing if seismic monitors detect a quake with a magnitude of 1.0 or higher. But it will ultimately be up to the oil and gas industry to figure out a way to carry out development without making the earth shake.

“I am confident that it is only a matter of time before we figure out how to exercise these technologies in a way that avoids significant quakes,” says Atkinson. Otherwise the fracking revolution may turn out to be short-lived.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline MKing

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3354
    • View Profile
Re: Fracking Quakes
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2014, 04:42:21 PM »
  Expert Geologists working for large Fracking Corporations assure us this is perfectly safe.  ::)

RE

No one who understands the non-deterministic nature of the world would ever say ANYTHING is perfectly safe. Sounds like standard blogger mythology to me.

Example...take the primary ingredient of modern frack jobs....



and just drink too much of it.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/strange-but-true-drinking-too-much-water-can-kill/

Poison is all in the proportion.

Quote from: RE
The Seismic Link Between Fracking and Earthquake

Oh please, what is it with the drama? Hydraulic stimulation by DEFINITION is a seismic event, creating entire SWARMS of earthquakes. What is it with people not understanding these processes?

Write a check and people will quantify these things for you. :icon_sunny:

http://www.halliburton.com/en-US/ps/stimulation/microseismic-fracture-mapping-fracture-modeling.page?node-id=hhnxkn2a

Quote
“I am confident that it is only a matter of time before we figure out how to exercise these technologies in a way that avoids significant quakes,” says Atkinson. Otherwise the fracking revolution may turn out to be short-lived.

short lived.....60+ years later.....this just keeps getting better and betterer!!
Sometimes one creates a dynamic impression by saying something, and sometimes one creates as significant an impression by remaining silent.
-Dalai Lama

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41399
    • View Profile
Re: Fracking Quakes
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2014, 04:57:10 PM »
Oh please, what is it with the drama? Hydraulic stimulation by DEFINITION is a seismic event, creating entire SWARMS of earthquakes. What is it with people not understanding these processes?

AKA, Please Move Along, Nothing to see here.  ::)

Wait till they set off the New Madrid fault line.

Quote
The 1811–1812 New Madrid earthquakes /nuː ˈmædrɨd/ were an intense intraplate earthquake series beginning with an initial pair of very large earthquakes on December 16, 1811. These earthquakes remain the most powerful earthquakes to hit the eastern United States in recorded history.[1] These events, as well as the seismic zone of their occurrence, were named for the Mississippi River town of New Madrid, then part of the Louisiana Territory, now within Missouri.

There are estimates that the earthquakes were felt strongly over roughly 130,000 square kilometers (50,000 sq mi), and moderately across nearly 3 million square kilometers (1 million square miles). The historic 1906 San Francisco earthquake, by comparison, was felt moderately over roughly 16,000 km2 (6,200 sq mi).

Oops, sorry,  we never said it was 100% safe.

Here's a map of the current fracking plays:


Here's a map of the New Madrid fault zone:


See a correlation here?

Hey!  Why don't you go play with some Matches in an Ammunition Dump!  It would be safer.  ::)

Professor Moriarty and his Box of Matches


RE

« Last Edit: June 29, 2014, 05:08:40 PM by RE »
Save As Many As You Can

Offline MKing

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3354
    • View Profile
Re: Fracking Quakes
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2014, 07:24:44 PM »
Oh please, what is it with the drama? Hydraulic stimulation by DEFINITION is a seismic event, creating entire SWARMS of earthquakes. What is it with people not understanding these processes?

AKA, Please Move Along, Nothing to see here.  ::)

Not for the last 6 decades anyway...but as with all things, people should keep looking, someday there could be a mistake and something bad might happen. After the next million hydraulic stimulations anyway.

Quote from: RE
Wait till they set off the New Madrid fault line.

Calculate the energy involved sometime, the orientation of stress fields with, and without, some water (already insitu for those unfamiliar with pore and capillary pressure calculations and why they are necessary) being added to the system. And then calculate the % difference in those fields with..and without...that additional water.

And when you do, you'll understand that if New Madrid wants to go, more water in the system won't have made the difference.

Quote from: RE
Oops, sorry,  we never said it was 100% safe.

Nothing is 100% safe. You assign certainty where none exists.

Quote from: RE
See a correlation here?

Yes. You don't understand how to do the basic calculations on the stress field orientation and intend to pretend that simple geographic proximity is relevant. Would you like me to introduce you to some world class seismologists, I'm sure I could round up a few through professional contacts...well...I could if I don't tell them it is for explaining Seismology 101 to bloggers with a history of purposefully misrepresenting information. They get cranky dealing with such folks, just as I do with reporters.
Sometimes one creates a dynamic impression by saying something, and sometimes one creates as significant an impression by remaining silent.
-Dalai Lama

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41399
    • View Profile
Re: Fracking Quakes
« Reply #4 on: June 29, 2014, 07:32:58 PM »
Moriarty's latest contribution to the Duly Noted & Filed bin is a claim he wrote a paper dismantling the notion that Fracking poses a serious risk on a geological level.

Quote from: Professor Moriarty
I've written one relatively large, peer reviewed, and published awhile ago paper dismantling an entire method by a large and well known organization who dared do such a thing.

There are of course no links to said paper so Diners can go and review it.

Moriarty also once again Puffs Himself Up as the only person around here who can possibly understand the risks involved.

Quote
Not only am I one of the few who would even understand how to stay away from such a thing based on 15 years of science training

Same old Appeal to Authority arguments without ever backing up his bullshit.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

RE
« Last Edit: June 29, 2014, 07:43:54 PM by RE »
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41399
    • View Profile
Re: Fracking Quakes
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2014, 07:40:31 PM »
Res Ipsa Loquitor.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41399
    • View Profile
Re: Fracking Quakes
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2014, 10:25:25 PM »
To be fair, I went googling to find some of the papers written by the Industry funded "scientists" regarding fracking and earthquake relationships.

You have to remember when reading this sort of stuff it comes from the same folks who told you Nuclear Power was safe and GMO foods are healthy.

The upshot is, yea we know fracking causes earthquakes, but don't worry, so far nothing bigger than maybe  4 or 5 on the Richter scale, and it doesn't happen too often.

At the same time, the same shills admit they don't have access to or are not allowed to use proprietary data held by the Frackerstein Corporations.
.
Quote
5.3 Subsurface Faulting
The Ewing (1990)
Tectonic Map of Texas
is the best publicly
available compilation of
subsurface faulting in the state. However, this compilation is more than 20 years old and if
an updated map/database of faulting were to be compiled, it would provide a useful starting
place for assessing possible relationships be
tween induced/triggered seismicity and
faulting. Some of this information has been compiled by, and is available for purchase, from
GeoMap Company. However, their maps are proprietary and it would require permissions
from this company to publish the updated information.
Typically private companies have collected considerable amounts of proprietary
information about subsurface structure in regions within Texas where petroleum fields and
injection disposal wells are situated. Obviously this information would be immensely
valuable for assessing the relationship between seismic activity and both petroleum
production and wastewater injection. If possible, it would be desirable to develop an
industry/university or industry/government collaborative program to share this
information. Up to the present the efforts of myself and my colleagues at the University of
Texas to do this have been unsuccessful; that is, we have been unable to reach agreements
with individual companies about sharing proprietary information; n
or were we successful in a 2010 attempt to form a consortium of companies to address these issues

INDUCED OR TRIGGERED EARTHQUAKES IN TEXAS: ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT
KNOWLEDGE AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH


Now, what would you say the chances are that University of Texas geologists, who are funded by the Oil Industry would come back with a conclusion fracking risks are large?  All they will say is the subject merits further study.

Now here's the deal.  Say tomorrow the New Madrid fault did let go, taking out St. Louis, Cincinatti and Louisville?  Frackers just say, "there is no evidence that proves that anything we did initiated this event."  Could happen on its own of course, and inevitably will also.  However, generally speaking it is best to let sleeping bears lie.  Digging post holes in your garden isn't usually a problem either, except when you punch through the city gas line by accident.  LOL.

As Moriarty often points out, fracking has been going on a long time, but nowhere near the scale it does now since the "fracking revolution' which the shills tell us will bring Energy Independence to Amerika, while at the SAME time trying to figure out how to build enough LNG Tanker ports to export it to China!  Or Europe or wherever.  HTF can you trust folks who talk out of both sides of their mouths all the time saying completely contradictory things?

Moriarty uses the Appeal to Authority argument all the time, TRUST ME, I'm the EXPERT!  Meanwhile, he gets his fat paycheck from a Fracking company.  ::)  Besides that, he won't even own up to anything he has written and provide links to the documents so Diners can peruse them for themselves.  This is somebody you can TRUST???

The chances a single fracking operation could set off a big quake are likely quite small.  Less small though would be the chances many such operations could do so.  The risk is not ZERO here.  Do the companies bear the risk for this?  No they do not.  If a real big disaster does occur, you the Taxpayer are supposed to clean up the mess via Goobermint Bailouts.  See the Exxon Valdez, the Macondo Well Blowout, Fukushima et al.

Whenever somebody says "Don't worry, trust me, I'm an expert" and is collecting a paycheck for just what you are supposed to trust him on, it is immediately a conflict of interest.  Nothing Moriarty says can bee seen in any other light.  Particularly when he does not even have the cojones to link his own papers.

Nothing to see here, please move along.

RE
« Last Edit: June 29, 2014, 10:29:23 PM by RE »
Save As Many As You Can

Offline WHD

  • Administrator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3177
    • View Profile
Re: Fracking Quakes
« Reply #7 on: June 30, 2014, 09:08:25 AM »
It's not just the MKing says, 'I'm the expert. I know. I will tell you.' He also loves to say in so many words, 'you are too stupid to understand so I'm not even going to try to explain it to you, dummy.' LOL ::)

WHD

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41399
    • View Profile
Re: Fracking Quakes
« Reply #8 on: June 30, 2014, 03:25:08 PM »
It's not just the MKing says, 'I'm the expert. I know. I will tell you.' He also loves to say in so many words, 'you are too stupid to understand so I'm not even going to try to explain it to you, dummy.' LOL ::)
WHD

Of course.  That's all part of the dodge.  By belittling others he seeks to enhance his own credibility, without ever producing the papers he brags about having written.  He's basically insecure and seeks to cover up his insecurity by being an egotistical blowhard.

In any event, the whole argument here boils down to "Don't worry, they're only small earthquakes". ::)

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41399
    • View Profile
New Yawkers Lead the Charge Against the Frackerstein Monster
« Reply #9 on: July 02, 2014, 12:41:43 AM »
Good to see my old compadres in the Big Apple and elsewhere around the state have taken up the Legal Battle against the Frackerststeins.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/w1FLZPFI3jc?feature=player_detailpage" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/w1FLZPFI3jc?feature=player_detailpage</a>

RE

NY Anti-Fracking Ruling Deals Blow To Shale Industry

Tyler Durden's picture



 

Submitted by Nick Cunningham of OilPrice.com,

A recent court ruling giving cities and towns in New York State the authority to ban hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) represents an enormous blow to the shale gas industry, which has been hoping to expand operations into the state for several years.

New York imposed a moratorium on fracking in 2008 so it could study the environmental impact, which industry opponents say includes adverse effects on groundwater supplies and public health. Fracking involves injecting a cocktail of water, sand, and chemicals deep underground at pressure high enough to fracture shale rock so the oil or gas within can be extracted.

Governor Andrew Cuomo has been under significant pressure from the industry to lift the moratorium, but has punted on the issue -- some say to avoid making a politically controversial decision.

New York sits atop the vast Marcellus and Utica shale formations, which hold huge volumes of shale oil and gas. But due to the moratorium, the state has not seen the expansion of drilling that nearby states like Pennsylvania and Ohio have experienced.

In the past six years, towns and cities across New York have acted on their own, passing municipal bans. One, the upstate town of Dryden, was taken to court by an energy company after it prohibited fracking.

By a 5-2 vote, the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, ruled that the actions taken by local communities to restrict fracking amounted to a “reasonable exercise” of their zoning authority, particularly since high levels of drilling “would permanently alter and adversely affect the deliberately cultivated small-town character of their communities.”

The court decision could have a deflating effect on future drilling prospects in New York, even if the statewide moratorium is lifted. Although there are plenty of counties and cities that would support fracking, the patchwork of municipal bans could make drilling on a large scale difficult. Navigating the maze of municipal zoning laws could deter investment altogether.

“It’s going to have a real chilling effect on the investment in New York,” Thomas West, an attorney for Norse Energy, told Bloomberg News in an interview. “Most of the major companies are not going to see New York as open for business if they have to develop the resource around municipalities with bans.”

Brad Gill, executive director of the Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York, put in more bluntly, saying the decision is “one more nail in the coffin” for fracking in the Empire State.

A map put together by FracTracker.org shows why drillers would hesitate before pouring millions of dollars into leases and infrastructure. Over 75 towns have banned fracking, with many more considering provisions to restrict the drilling practice.

“The oil and gas industry tried to bully us into backing down, but we took our fight all the way to New York’s highest court.” Mary Ann Sumne, the Dryden, NY town supervisor, said in response to the ruling, “I hope our victory serves as an inspiration to people in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, Florida, North Carolina, California and elsewhere who are also trying to do what’s right for their own communities.”

Local control over fracking has cropped up as a major issue in several states across the country. The highest profile battleground is Colorado, where several cities have passed fracking bans, including Fort Collins, Longmont, and Lafayette. The oil and gas industry is fighting the bans in court, and trying to head off more bans in cities that have experienced an increase in drilling activity.

A movement to put the issue on a statewide ballot in November’s election is gaining steam. The industry has criticized the ballot push for being a stealth effort to enact an outright state ban on fracking while cloaking itself in the language of local sovereignty.

On June 30, the Colorado Supreme Court handed ballot organizers a victory with a ruling that says they can proceed with gathering signatures on petitions to put as many as six anti-fracking measures up for a vote. A deadline of August 4 has been set for the submission of signatures -- 86,105 of which are needed for each measure organizers want to see the public decide.

« Last Edit: July 02, 2014, 12:51:24 AM by RE »
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41399
    • View Profile
Anti-Fracking Poster Material
« Reply #10 on: July 09, 2014, 02:31:28 AM »
Nice series of Anti-Fracking Posters in this Power Point from Brian Davey from the FEASTA website.

Quote
This powerpoint and series of posters were prepared by Brian Davey for Frack Free Notts (an anti-fracking campaign in Nottinghamshire in the UK). They provide a succinct overview of the problems with fracking. The posters are PDFs and work best when printed out in A1 (large) size.

http://www.feasta.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/PosterV3.pdf

http://www.feasta.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/UGWhyNowV3.pdf

http://www.feasta.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Bridge-to-a-low-carbon-future.pdf

http://www.feasta.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/RegulatingUGPosterV2.pdf

http://www.feasta.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Unconventional-Gas-and-Jobs.pdf

Print and Post at your local Coffee Shop today!

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41399
    • View Profile
Fracking Pollution
« Reply #11 on: July 15, 2014, 04:11:03 PM »
Quote from: Prof. Moriarty
"Fracking is very safe.  It has been going on for years with very few problems".

OK, I'm paraphrasing, but this is the general gist of Moriarty's arguments.  However, as they ramp up with bigger and more frequent operations, even low frequency disasters start to mount up.

RE

Huge ND Wastewater Spill Prompts Calls For Fracking Regs

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 07/15/2014 15:06 -0400
 

Submitted by Andy Tully via OilPrice.com,

Beaver dams have so far prevented about 1 million gallons of fracking wastewater discovered spilled July 8 from a rural North Dakota pipeline from spreading too far. But area residents, environmentalists and even a Republican state legislator all want more reliable measures.

The spill of the toxic saltwater, a byproduct of hydraulic fracturing, came from gas extraction operations at the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation and occurred days before it was discovered.

The federal Environmental Protection Agency said the underground pipeline spilled about 24,000 barrels, or 1 million gallon, in North Dakota’s thriving oil and gas region. The water, which can be 10 times saltier than seawater and contains salt and fossil fuel condensates, was being piped away from fuel extraction sites for safe disposal.

The spill has been threatening Bear Den Bay on nearby Lake Sakakawea, which provides water for the reservation occupied by the Arikara, Hidasta and Mandan tribes, though the EPA said there is no evidence that the lake has been contaminated.

In fact, it said, most of the saltwater had pooled near where it had spilled and that beaver dams in the area had kept it from spreading. As a result, the EPA said, the local soil has simply been absorbing the spill.

That’s a bit too fortuitous for Wayde Schafer, a spokesman for the Sierra Club in North Dakota. He said there have been four other spills in the region recently, including three caused by lightning strikes and a fourth attributed to a cow that rubbed against a tank valve.

With its current oil and gas boom, North Dakota has become the second most productive energy state behind Texas. By relying greatly on fracking, though, it also produces millions of barrels of wastewater daily that, like nuclear waste, must be buried underground forever.

In 2013 alone, there were 74 pipeline leaks that spilled 22,000 barrels of saltwater. Yet that same year, the North Dakota Legislature voted 86 to 4 against a bill that would have mandated flow meters and cutoff switches on wastewater-disposal pipelines. Energy companies protested the cost of such measures, and even state regulators argued they wouldn’t detect small leaks.

State Rep. Dick Anderson, a Republican farmer from Willow City, about 140 miles northeast of Lake Sakakawea, wants the legislature to reconsider the bill. He said a revised bill should require energy companies to conduct more frequent examination of the wastewater pipelines, including dogs trained to sniff for spills and even aerial drones that can spot pipeline breaks.

Arrow Pipeline LLC, which owns the pipeline whose spill has been threatening Lake Sakakawea, said the accident wasn’t discovered until employees were reviewing reports on production losses.

Crestwood Midstream Partners LP of Houston, which owns Arrow Pipeline, said the cleanup is likely to last for weeks.
Save As Many As You Can

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
458 Replies
82330 Views
Last post June 24, 2020, 04:34:49 AM
by RE
3 Replies
1455 Views
Last post May 20, 2015, 02:16:18 PM
by MKing
1 Replies
463 Views
Last post March 09, 2018, 02:22:02 AM
by Surly1