Articles in Category: Environment

Rising metals prices are having many ramifications for miners, manufacturers and consumers, but one unwelcome result of rising metal values is also an increase in illegal mining. Just as higher metal prices encourage greater legal scrap generation and recycling, at the same time, it encourages the illegal stripping of lead from church roofs and copper cables from train line and power installations.

Within the mining and refining world, rising metal prices have encouraged a huge increase in capital expenditure and a welcome focus by the major mining companies on organic growth rather than acquisition. But at the same time, the improving returns to be had from rising metal prices have encouraged unscrupulous and even downright criminal elements to invest large sums of money and develop elaborate gangland “ownership around resources in developing countries. Often these resources are in locations too distant for the authorities to readily control what is going on and the consequences, both human and environmental, can be catastrophic.

A more graphic example probably does not exist than the illegal gold mining in the state of Madre de Dios, in Peru’s south-eastern Amazon jungle. Peru is the world’s sixth-largest producer of gold and Madre de Dios ranks as its second-largest gold producing region. While many of the miners are from poor mountainous parts of Peru, local authorities say big private investors from Peru, Mexico, China, Korea, and Brazil have moved in to control illegal mining activities. Tragically, the state of Madre de Dios is also known as the country’s capital of biodiversity. Among tangled vines, giant fig and cedar trees and deep lagoons live more than 200 mammals, 1,000 bird species and 15,000 species of flowering plants, but the illegal mining has left a moonscape of deforestation resulting in widespread soil erosion and poisoned water-filled pits covering an estimated 18,000 hectares.

According to an FT article, the authorities have tried to control mining activities, moving in with force to halt the gangs resulting in the death and injury of several miners. Armed forces blew up 19 river dredges each valued at some $250,000, but 15,000 rioting miners in many cases coerced by the gangs controlling the mines have forced Antonio Brack, the environment minister, to call a halt to the campaign for fear of further casualties. Meanwhile, mercury used in the rudimentary gold separation technology devastated wildlife with levels triple those considered safe in waterways.

In neighboring Colombia, the authorities are facing a similar battle against illegal gold mining that has caused the world’s highest levels of mercury contamination and similar lunar-like landscape of poisoned lakes and soil erosion. As in Peru, poor Colombian miners are controlled by local gangs; peasants employed as miners say they have two choices, illegal gold mining or the growing of illegal coca crops nothing else pays a living wage.

Ignoring environmental degradation for any sustained period can leave a legacy beyond the capacity of the country to repair itself, as South Africa is finding to its cost today, reports Mail & Guardian online. Acid-leached uranium-bearing residues from dozens of gold mine tailings left behind at Witwatersrand Reef from workings up to 100 years old are contaminating ground water and endangering health. Some are so dangerous that local families have had to be moved when radiation levels were recorded at levels higher than the Chernobyl exclusion zone. In fact, the concentration is so high that the ministry for mines has been approached by mining companies keen to re-work the tailings dumps, but, as local environmentalists say, that will result in two contaminated areas for every site, one where the original tailings resided and another where the new dump will be. It is doubtful South Africa will ever be able to afford a full cleanup and will end up with no-go areas around these contaminated tailings heaps.

Unlike Peru and Colombia, the mining in the Witwatersrand was not illegal, but to have allowed the uranium-contaminated tailings to be left in dumps where they could be leached into ground water would be a prosecutable offense today and the legacy of environmental destruction is an illustration of what mercury pollution in those South American mining areas could be creating by way of a legacy for the Amazon.

–Stuart Burns

Reports coming in from Brazil suggest Thyssen’s new 5 million ton-per-year steel mill at Santa Cruz near Rio may not be as environmentally well controlled as much older plants back home in Germany. According to the company, when it reaches full production, 3 million tons per year will be supplied to the processing plant also under construction near Mobile, Ala., and 2 million tons will go to ThyssenKrupp’s plants in Germany. Environmental controls in both the US and Germany are so strict, Thyssen’s apparent repeated violations reported by IPS News would not be tolerated, but in Brazil the company has so far gotten away with it.

“Air pollution in Santa Cruz is constant, and some days it is so intense that a silvery rain falls over the community, hurting people’s health, especially that of children and elderly people,” the protesters are reported as saying. Provincial lawmaker Marcelo Freixo of the Socialism and Freedom Party blames the dust pollution on graphite generated from the production of pig iron. Graphite is sometimes released as a byproduct of coke combustion in the blast furnace and although not carcinogenic, graphite dust is known to cause irritation to eyes, nose, skin and has been linked to respiratory problems such as pneumoconiosis. The plant has twice been fined for graphite dust releases, following the second of which the firm agreed to invest in better control equipment even though it claimed previous releases were one-offs.

The Rio de Janeiro state prosecutor’s office accused the company of polluting the atmosphere at levels “capable of harming human health.” IPS reports the charge was based on studies by the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro’s Institute of Geosciences, which found a 600 percent increase in the average iron concentration in the area around the ironworks, compared to the period before the plant opened. There are also reports of pollution in the local bay area resulting, it is claimed, in a dramatic decline in fish stocks compared to the period prior to plant opening. Some emission problems are bound to occur with such a major new installation, but Thyssen is going to have to resolve these issues promptly if they are not to be labeled as merely exporting their environmental degradation to emerging markets rather than face tougher controls at home.

–Stuart Burns

Happy New Year! As the saying goes, it’s good to be back in the saddle again (some of you may have caught the news that we welcomed our third son Simon on December 3). In between feedings, and admittedly, the baby’s and my nap schedule, many significant developments in the world of industrial metals occurred which we did not have the opportunity to cover on the site. Over the course of two posts, we’ll highlight those we feel will have the most significance to metal buying organizations in 2011 and beyond and dive into many of these stories over the coming days. First, let’s focus on where industry meets public policy.

The story: Industry groups move to clean up sourcing of Ëœblood minerals’ comes as a result of the enactment of the Frank-Dodd financial reform bill requiring US corporations to “state whether they source ‘conflict minerals’ from both Congo and neighboring countries and “report on steps taken to exclude conflict sources from their supply chains, backed by independent audits, according to a post on MetalMiner quoting The Enough! Project.

Why we think it is significant: This article points to two separate initiatives taken by manufacturers using a range of metals in their high-tech products. One initiative involves a “Conflict-Free Smelter Program that aims to “¦identify smelters that can demonstrate through an independent third-party assessment that the raw materials they procured did not originate from sources that contribute to conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo, according to the story. The second initiative, called a “bag and tag program, certifies the origin of materials sources from the DRC. According to the article, “under the program, tags would follow the minerals offshore, certifying they had not been extracted from conflict mines. In this post, MetalMiner offers up additional means of complying with the legislation.

The story:
Battle Brews over EPA’s New Emissions Regulations and The EPA’s War on Texas highlight the likely drawn-out legal battles already unfolding, relating to the EPA’s regulation of greenhouse gas emissions.

Why we think it is significant: No matter the side of the debate anyone personally sits on with regard to greenhouse gas emissions, protracted legal battles will continue to create business uncertainty. According to the Businessweek article, “Unlike carbon cap-and-trade legislation, which would have fixed a limit on greenhouse-gas emissions, the regulations will focus on pushing plants to run at higher levels of efficiency or use cleaner fuels by requiring them to use the best available technology to reduce emissions. Of course, these regulations will require additional capital investments with costs getting passed down to consumers, whether they’re large metal producers or consumers.

MetalMiner and its sister site, Spend Matters, along with Nucor, will host a live simulcast, International Trade Breaking Point on March 1, 2011.   If your company sources products from overseas, you will not want to miss this half-day event:

Register for the live simulcast today!

Lisa Reisman

From a global economic standpoint, arguably it was a close run thing but we can probably say we have avoided a double dip, thanks in large part to continued strong emerging market demand keeping the world economy ticking along and the production lines of international manufacturing companies humming.

Indeed while consumer demand and construction markets in mature economies have been depressed the one abiding feature of the post crisis period has been relatively strong manufacturing performances. With access to cheap cash and in most cases strong balance sheets, manufacturers have weathered the storm and are continuing to be upbeat. In a Reuters report the Institute for Supply Management’s index of U.S. factory activity slipped to 54.4 last month from 56.3 in August. While the Markit Euro Zone Manufacturing PMI suggested a two-speed recovery taking hold in Europe, with the headline index dropping to 53.7 in September from 55.1 in August led by strong German and French performance and weak Club Med economies such as Ireland, Spain and Greece. Manufacturing growth in Britain, meanwhile, fell to its lowest since November as exports declined for the first time since July 2009, but even so the PMI remained in positive territory only falling to 53.4 from 53.7. Meanwhile, China’s official PMI rose to 53.8 in September from 51.7 in August, well above a median forecast of 52. A separate Chinese manufacturing PMI from HSBC also showed a strong upturn in September, rising to 52.9 from 51.9 in August.

So not surprisingly on the back of such positive manufacturing indicators steel demand is expected to hit a record 1.34 billion tons next year even though steel growth will slow to 5.3%. According to a later Reuters article, China will make up 45% of global demand in 2011, while India will emerge as the world’s third-biggest steel consumer after China and the United States the World Steel Association is quoted as saying. In an example of how emerging market production is coming to dominate the global market, the World Steel Association is said to be picking Xiangang Zhang, president of Anshan Iron & Steel Corp, as its chairman for the following year, which will be the first time its head has come from China. China’s demand in 2011 will be 42% above the level in 2007, compared to demand in the developed world in 2011 which is expected to be 25% below the 2007 level, Paolo Rocca, the body’s current chairman.

Demand for steel is set to rise 13.1% to 1.27 billion tons this year, much faster than an earlier forecast of 8.4% growth but still leaving the market in surplus. The great unknown will be growth in both demand and production in China. Titanic forces are at work in the Chinese steel market with Beijing trying to reign back polluting and energy consuming industries. At the same time   simultaneously curbing excess speculative construction activity on one side while steel producers jostle for market share supported by their local governments and encouraged to keep producing by a cooling but still strong domestic steel consuming market. Growth is predicted by the association to slow in China next year to 3.5% from an estimated 6.75% this year. Whether that will happen is anyone’s guess.

–Stuart Burns

Wind Power Jobs Going Overseas

by on
Style:
Category:
Environment, Global Trade, Green

It is probably fair to say that Britain is rarely first at anything but last week the tiny isle became the largest producer of electricity from off shore wind farms in the world. In fact according to an article in the Financial Times, Britain now generates more power from off shore wind than the rest of the world put together to be fair that is only a small fraction of the total power generated from wind and contrary to some suggestions is no reflection on the excess of hot air that emanates from Britain’s parliament. The world beating position was achieved this month when 100 turbines were started up at Thanet off the UK’s south-east coast bringing Britain’s total to more than 5GW of wind generating capacity. Briefly on September 6,  more than 10% of the UK’s electricity came from wind power during one 24 hour period according to a quote in the paper.

Offshore wind farms are a sight to behold, without the concerns of visual pollution or noise associated with many land based projects turbines at the upper end of current technology are employed. Thanet Development’s 100 turbines are each over 375ft tall and generate 3MW of power. Collectively they can generate enough power to supply 200,000 homes, and are spread out in eight lanes over an area of 35 sq kms (13.5 sq miles).

The title of world’s biggest offshore wind farm will not last long though, the Guardian newspaper reports that just up the coast is the Greater Gabbard offshore project with its 140 turbines, which will be followed by the even bigger London Array scheme in the Thames Estuary. When completed, this alone will generate 1000MW. But as off shore wind developments hit the headlines alongside it is a growing annoyance that just as in the US with solar power, a significant part of the components and work is going to overseas suppliers. In the case of the UK, only 20% of the £900m ($1400m) that has gone into the industry has gone to UK firms. Most of it has gone to German and Danish turbine manufacturers who have ramped up onshore turbine manufacturing capabilities to make the much larger off shore installations. Even the project’s backers in the case of Thanet are the Swedish energy company Vattenfall. Cash strapped Britain has a choice over whether to spend some £60m ($90m) to upgrade port facilities to build the off shore structures and hence bring more of the work into the UK or to continue to import equipment. With an estimated £200bn of investment identified to meet potential projects around windier Scotland’s coast in the coming decade there is plenty of opportunity for a good ROI on any such investment. If the British government in London will not support it, the Scottish parliament is said to be setting up a “green bank with some £360m ($550m) to fund port and related infrastructure in an effort to keep as much work at home as possible.

In a geographically small market like Europe every country will have to fight hard even for a decent share of the funds being spent on their own renewable infrastructure. It really would be a poor deal for Britain if British consumers continued to subsidize wind-power through heavy tariff premiums only to pay German and Danish turbine suppliers and line the pockets of Swedish shareholders.

–Stuart Burns

To continue our discussion on aluminum markets, scrap trends and prices, we wanted to recap some of the discussion we heard last week at the ISRI Commodity Round Table Conference here in Chicago last week. The panelists, Gary Curtis of Wise Metals Group, Toshi Fukui, TAI Metals Division, Toyota Tsusho America, Mo Ahmadzadeh, Southhold Capital LLC, Lloyd O’Carroll, Davenport & Co. and Joe Sasso, JAS Consulting (the last two recently spoke at the HARBOR Aluminum conference here in Chicago in June) provided insight and support to many of the conclusions drawn in Stuart’s earlier post of today.

The story behind the ISRI conference largely supports the conclusions of the Reuters discussion Stuart referred to, essentially supporting rising aluminum prices through the end of this year and into next year. Mo Ahmadzadeh talked about aluminum versus other base metals, “This market has underperformed the other base metals this year because inventories are relatively high (100 days of consumption on a global basis). The subject of aluminum inventories fed into a discussion about the current aluminum warehousing/finance deals and when specifically inventory could hit the market. Panelist Mo Ahmadzadeh cited the key driver enabling the warehousing arrangement involves the differential between discounted warehouse rent and the yield on money. “Interest rates, so long as they remain low, will enable arrangements to be made in warehousing and material to make it a viable proposition, and like Reuters commentator Andy Home, Ahmadzadeh echoed similar sentiments regarding what will happen to inventory should an aluminum ETF launch later this year, “the material on the LME is remaining there probably because it will be the bedrock/source of material for the ETF. He added that inventory will unlikely make its way onto the open market because it will remain financed and under long term key so to speak.

One question an audience member raised the rationale behind an aluminum ETF gave panelist Mo Ahmadzadeh an opportunity to compare how investors look at gold ETFs, “The rationale behind an ETF may involve political instability, lack of faith in markets, currencies or perhaps the desire to own something that is a hard asset those are the things that are drivers of interest in aluminum as an ETF.  He went on to discuss the amount of investor money currently on the sidelines, “A lot of money or investment dollars can’t invest outside of securities. The introduction of PGM ETFs was very successful. Allocating part of your investment portfolio to real assets helps to stabilize and/or reduce risk for one’s portfolio, he continued. He went on to say that ETFs in the form of metal pure plays appear attractive to investors. Ahmadzadeh estimates that an ETF (supported by Alcoa’s CEO) will take one million tons out of the equation. Read more

In an article last week we explored the possibility that many of the jobs we had expected to materialize from “green tech” industries such as wind and solar power would in reality end up in China as manufacturers in those markets are given support and subsidy to assist them in exports around the world. In a separate article this week we discussed trends in the high tech aviation industry, until recently considered the preserve of technologically advanced western nations. The common thread linking these previous articles and what follows is that times are a changing, and they are changing fast. Where we had assumed somewhat arrogantly that a mixture of inventiveness, entrepreneurial spirit and technological sophistication would keep us one step ahead of low wage Asian competitors at least in the more sophisticated “knowledge economy the fact is we are being challenged at every turn. I don’t want to sound like a doomsayer, this is not the end of western civilization. Emerging markets such as China are not without their own problems in other ways but what is clear is that the 5-10 year lead we felt we had is fast disappearing because Asian suppliers are using technology transfers into their home market linked with lower manufacturing costs and the easy availability of mind bogglingly large sums of finance to give western firms a run for their money in the global market place.

No better example exists than the rail industry. As a Financial Times article explains, the world’s big-three passenger train manufacturers Siemens of Germany, France’s Alstom and Canada’s Bombardier along with GE and Caterpillar’s EMD Division, the dominant forces in diesel locomotives, have long bet advanced technology would keep them on top of the world’s rail supply market. But as Siemens realized when they recently bid to supply high-speed trains for Saudi Arabia’s inaugural high-speed rail project between Mecca and Medina they were being out bid by a Chinese consortium and to stay in the race they had to join in with the Chinese.

The Chinese producers ability to undercut western manufacturers and in many cases to provide solutions that do not require the same level of technological sophistication as European or North American buyers expect will mean major infrastructure projects in Africa, South America and wider Asian markets will go their way. There have been reports that suggest Chinese technology has not been as reliable as western suppliers but that gap will narrow as Chinese manufacturers learn from the technology transfers that are an integral part of western companies being allowed to supply to China’s own massive rail development projects. Technically under the technology transfer agreements that technology may not be then used in export contracts but it is entirely possible that a modification to a design or technique can circumvent such restrictions or that greater understanding of the technologies involved could allow Chinese designers to engineer alternative solutions that do not blatantly infringe upon any agreements.

Peter Ulrich, of the Boston Consulting Group, who oversaw production of a rail market report commissioned by Unife, the European railway industry association, is quoted in the FT as predicting a slowdown in average annual growth rates in Asia’s rail markets to just 2.5% around the middle of this decade. That could leave Chinese factories supplying China’s high-speed network with significant spare capacity. Will they scale back capacity or will those companies look for opportunities outside China? What do you think?

–Stuart Burns

What is the biggest impediment to the roll out of environmentalists wind powered future? Is it finance in this cash strapped world, is it lack of suitable windy places, is it that the economic viability is based on subsidies that could be withdrawn or scaled back as they have been in Spain?

No, according to a NY Times article reporting on projects in three major southwestern states. The problem is the US military. Or to be more precise objections from the military and FAA that wind turbines can interfere with radar. Apparently wind turbines can look very similar to storm activity on weather radar making it hard for air traffic controllers to give accurate weather information to pilots. In other cases the military has complained that as a result of existing developments in the Tehachapi Mountains to the west of a major military installation in the Mojave desert, they cannot test airborne radar used for target detection on F/A-18’s and other aircraft creating no-go, or at least no-test areas. Various cases appear to have impeded low level flying, low level high speed maneuvers, radar testing and development, etc. Modern turbines can reach 400ft into the sky and to be economic have to be sited at the windiest place on the hill – the top.

In 2009 about half of proposed wind turbine projects were abandoned or delayed because of radar related concerns raised by the military and FAA, a total of about 9GW was constructed out of about 18 GW planned. Nor is it just the vast military testing grounds of California, Arizona and Nevada. Projects in the Columbia River Gorge on the Oregon-Washington border and in the Great Lakes region have met the same fate.

Part of the problem appears to be that filtering out the wind turbine clutter is challenging when some of the radar systems date back to the 1950’s and have outdated or limited processing capability. Technological fixes are possible but are piecemeal and potentially unsound. On radar, “a wind turbine can look like a 747 on final approach, Peter Drake, technical director at Raytheon, a major provider of radar systems is quoted as saying. “We don’t want to have the software eliminate a real 747.

May be the answer is a levy on all wind power projects to go towards upgrading radar systems so the two can live in harmony, like the nuclear industry paying for radioactive cleanup or the banks into a financial services insurance fund? Personally I am somewhat horrified to hear radar provision in 2010 is still in part relying on equipment from the 1950’s, when the Airforce spends $160m on an F22 Raptor ($350m including the cost of development) or US$2bn on a B-2 bomber shouldn’t the radar used to test, train and direct them be at least 21st century?

–Stuart Burns

There is a large and largely unseen transfer of money going on between the west and Asia (principally China and India) that if the average citizen were asked they would most likely have trouble seeing the value. I talk of carbon-backed offsets formerly known as Certified Emissions Reductions that are issued under the U.N.’s Clean Development Mechanism. The scheme is intended to reward investors in clean energy projects in developing countries. The logic is fine at face value, investors backing new power station projects have the option of various fuel sources and technologies, some cost more than others and some create more carbon emissions than others per unit of input material be it coal, natural gas, nuclear or whatever. By giving credits to projects that choose the most efficient technologies and the least polluting fuels the west encourages developing countries to make the “right choices. CER’s are internationally tradable and according to a Reuters article major buyers – usually large European polluters can buy the offsets and use them to meet the mandatory emissions reductions under the EU’s emission trading scheme.

Of the 425.4 million CERs issued so far by the UN panel managing this scheme, India has received 79.2 million and China 209.7 million. Each CDM trades for around 13 euros, meaning EU corporations have paid Indian companies something like one billion euros and paid Chinese companies not far short of three billion euros for the right to continue emitting carbon dioxide. Ultimately the shareholders and customers of these European corporations foot the bill in lower profits or higher fees respectively. Has it resulted in less carbon dioxide being emitted? Well no, in the case of all these CER’s purchased by European companies you have to say that in the year(s) they were purchased those companies did not reduce their emissions. Does it encourage them to reduce their emissions in the future? Possibly depending on whether it is cheaper to go on buying CER’s at 13 euros a shot or to invest in technology to reduce emissions in the future. To the core of the project does it encourage lower emission projects to be built in emerging countries? Well let’s see.

Reuters tells us a total of 520 Indian CDM projects have been formally registered by the U.N. governing panel while more than 850 others are in the development pipeline. China has 917 projects registered out of a total project pipeline of more than 2,100. In total, there are more than 5,300 projects in the CDM pipeline of which 2,317 have already been registered. A recent report in a different Reuters article advised that a $4.2-billion 4,000-MW coal fired power plant being built in the western state of Gujarat by Tata Power will not qualify for CER’s even though a very similar project being built next door by Tata’s rival Adani Power did qualify. The Adani Power project for a 4,620 MW power station won CDM approval in December as the world’s first super-critical coal-fired plant, set to get more than 18 million CERs by 2021.

Investors claim the 26.5 million CERs the Tata project would have earned by 2020, valued at 318 million euros ($419 million) was part of the justification for going for the more expensive but less polluting super critical technology. But experts said it probably would not have been factored into the calculations prior to actually receiving approval. Which begs the question why is the EU paying all this money to Indian and Chinese investors when the projects stand up on their own account? The coal burning super critical steam technology is said to add up to 10% to the capital cost of the plant but is estimated to boost the thermal efficiency from the 36-40% range to 40-45%, gaining more than 10% more energy from every ton of coal burned. With rising thermal coal prices this is a payback investors realize many times over during the life of the plant.

Both China and India have realized they have major environmental issues with their rapidly industrializing economies and China in particular is investing billions in more environmentally friendly methods of power generation and industrial production. Why are EU countries, many of them a fraction of China’s size paying the country to invest in the latest technologies when China (and increasingly India) has already committed to doing it anyway? Meanwhile those European polluters are still polluting. You have to ask what’s the point?

–Stuart Burns

I suppose 220 jobs are better than none, but the balance 780 workers who lost their jobs when Tata Steel’s Corus division closed the Redcar steelworks in the UK last year could be forgiven for wondering if this isn’t just a sop to local interests which have lobbied hard to have the plant kept open. As the Guardian newspaper reports, the plant became uneconomic when a consortium of international investors pulled out of a 10 year contract. Since then the plant has been under the threat of closure as Tata has struggled to find either a buyer for the plants steel or a buyer for the plant itself. Although steel has been made on the site for 170 years there is not sufficient demand in Europe for the mills products and relying on imported iron ore and coal, with a UK cost structure, makes the Redcar mill uneconomic on the global stage. Thai investors SSI have been in negotiations for months but closing a deal is probably based on all kinds of subsidies and support that no one is willing to give.

So where are the 220 jobs to come from? In a politicians dream of renewable energy rising phoenix like from the ashes of an old world industrial wasteland, Corus is to build a £31.5m (US$50m) off shore wind farm construction business on the Teeside site. The new facility will need space as the latest generation of offshore wind turbines and in particular the towers on which they stand are vast, but Redcar has 3,000 acres so even in the unlikely event SSI can be persuaded to take the steel mill space will not be a problem. Nor is a viable market likely to be a problem, as this article reports the UK is the world’s largest off shore wind turbine market with hugely ambitious plans to ramp up generating capacity in the future. In a gallant effort to make them remotely economic British designers are developing ever larger and more sophisticated designs such as this 10MW design called Aerogenerator X being developed by Arup in the UK.

As the following map shows the UK’s plans for new offshore wind farms are spread all round the country and although currently based on 3-5MW designs it is believed in only a couple of years we will see 9-10MW structures being built in a program that could amount to $75bn of investment.

The first 25,000 MW were awarded earlier this year and more will follow, particularly if designers can improve the economics with new or larger designs.

So although Corus failed to secure direct government financial support to keep the steel mill going they have maintained both a presence and a viable business on the Redcar site via indirect subsidies in the form of supply to the wind-power market. The attraction for the politicians is this subsidy comes from electricity users not from the government treasury.

–Stuart Burns

1 39 40 41 42 43 46