Tag Archives: global climate change

Californians Want to Fix the Drought—Without Spending Any Money

by 4q4cv8v Posted on June 7, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Californians agree their state’s drought is a big problem, but they’re not enthused about spending money to alleviate it. That’s one of the takeaways from a just-released University of Southern California/Los Angeles Times poll. Some other findings:

Big problem, getting bigger

Just prior to California’s last gubernatorial election in November 2010, 46 percent of voters agreed that “having enough water to meet our future needs” mattered “a great deal.” The proportion of people who care a lot about water issues has crept up a lot since then:

Last September, 63 percent of voters called the drought a “crisis or major problem.”
89 percent of voters call the drought a “crisis or major problem” now.

Save us some water, just don’t send us the bill

Californians are notoriously tax averse, but even what may be the worst drought in 500 years is apparently not enough to get most voters to agree that the state should improve its water infrastructure:

36 percent of voters said the state should improve water storage and delivery systems, even if it costs money.
52 percent said the state should address these problems without spending money, by taking measures like encouraging conservation.

Poorer people and Latinos are feeling harder hit

The poll found:

11 percentof people making more than $50,000 annually said the drought had a “major impact” on their lives.
24 percent of people making less than $50,000 annually said the same.
29 percent of people making less than $20,000 annually said the same.

It’s worth noting that some of California’s poorest people are Hispanic farm workers. While 25 percent of Latinos surveyed said the drought had a “major impact” on teir lives just 13 percent of people from other racial groups said the same.

Climate denial

A recent study has linked the drought to climate change, but some Californians still aren’t so sure about the connection. While 78 percent of Democrats said climate change was “very or somewhat responsible” for California’s water trouble, only 44 percent of Republicans agreed.

See original article:

Californians Want to Fix the Drought—Without Spending Any Money

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, global climate change, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged alo, californians, drought, flickr, global climate change, hispanic, people, september, voters, while | Comments Off

The Pope Says We Should Probably Get on Stopping Climate Change

by Posted on May 22, 2014

The Pope’s latest comments are not the first push from the Vatican to address global climate change

Continued here –

The Pope Says We Should Probably Get on Stopping Climate Change

Posted in GE, global climate change, Smith's, Uncategorized | Tagged global climate change, Smith's | Comments Off

Instead of Being Protected, Antarctica’s Oceans Will Be Open for Fishing

by John Basset Posted on July 17, 2013

A Weddell Seal sunbathes near Antarctica’s Ross Sea. Photo: Leonardo Sagnotti

As Antarctica is undergoing massive changes—in its climate, because of rapidly melting ice shelves, and in its biology, because invasive species are moving into the warming waters—it’s also playing a new role in scientists’ understanding of how life on Earth gets by. The continent was long thought to be a mostly barren wasteland, home to penguins and seals and little else, but recent investigations in the surrounding oceans and in lakes deep beneath the glaciers have turned up a wealth of new life—a trove of thriving species likely found nowhere else on Earth.

Recognizing Antarctica’s status as one of the last largely untapped ecosystems on Earth, many members of an international government consortium, the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), have been pushing hard to have 963 million acres of the Southern Ocean set off as a protected reserve. Pew Environment writes:

The proposed Southern Ocean protections included a Ross Sea marine reserve of 1.6 million square kilometres — where no fishing would be allowed — within a 2.3 million square kilometre marine protected area, and seven marine protected areas on the East Antarctic coast, covering an additional 1.6 million square kilometres. The Ross Sea plan was proposed by the United States and New Zealand; the East Antarctic protections were championed by Australia, France, and the E.U.

Scientists, say Pew, have “called the Ross Sea ‘The least altered marine ecosystem on Earth,’ with unusually large and closely interacting populations of several marine bird and mammal species.”

The Southern Ocean is home to thousands of unique species including most of the world’s penguins, whales, seabirds, colossal squid, and the remarkable but heavily fished Antarctic and Patagonian toothfish. The region is critical for scientific research, both for studying how intact marine ecosystems function and for determining the accelerating impacts of global climate change.

Unfortunately for those arguing for greater protections (which included representatives from the United States), the plan to set the Southern Ocean regions aside, free from fishing and other enterprises, has been nixed. At a meeting organized to discuss the plan, says Nature, a “surprise legal objection from Russian diplomats” stalled the plan.

[T]he Russian delegation questioned the very authority of the Commission for the Conservation on Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), which regulates fishing in Antarctica, to create reserves.

… This has enraged NGOs, who pointed out that CCAMLR has already created one such ‘marine protected area’ and that all of the commission’s members had previously agreed in principle that it should create such zones. NGO representatives accused Russia of coming in bad faith to the meeting, which was convened specifically to discuss the marine reserves after they were not agreed to at another meeting last year.

With no legal restrictions in place, fisheries would be free to act in the Southern Ocean. Indeed, fishing has been a “major sticking point in the talks,” says the BBC:

[S]pecies like krill and patagonian toothfish prov[e] highly lucrative for boats from a range of countries, including South Korea, Norway and Japan.

The tiny shrimp like Antarctic krill are a key element of the ecosystem, as they are part of the diet of whales, penguins, seals and sea birds.

However demand for krill has risen sharply in recent years thanks to growing interest in Omega-3 dietary supplements.

The group, says Der Spiegel, plans to meet once more in October to discuss the marine protected area. “Although there is hope that they may be approved there,” says Nature, “Russia’s hardline approach to this week’s meeting casts a long shadow, and raises serious doubts about the chances of approval.”

Americans are more worried about North Korean nukes than climate change

by Andrew Karolitz Posted on June 28, 2013

Americans are more worried about North Korean nukes than climate change

By John Upton

AAAARRRRGGGHHHH North Korea and nuclear bombs and other countries and stuff!!!!

Americans are less concerned about this climate change thing than other people around the world.

The Pew Research Group this week released the results of a worldwide survey of 37,653 residents of 39 countries, revealing that just 40 percent of Americans view global warming as a major threat to their country.

Across all countries surveyed, by comparison, 54 percent view global warming as a major threat. Concern was highest in Latin America and lowest in the U.S., with concern among Middle East residents nearly as low as those in America.

From the survey’s findings:

Concern about global climate change is particularly prevalent in Latin America, Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, and the Asian/Pacific region, but majorities in Lebanon, Tunisia and Canada also say climate change is a major threat to their countries. In contrast, Americans are relatively unconcerned about global climate change. Four-in-ten say this poses a major threat to their nation, making Americans among the least concerned about this issue of the 39 publics surveyed, along with people in China, Czech Republic, Jordan, Israel, Egypt and Pakistan.

It’s not that Americans aren’t sitting around worrying about stuff. We’re plenty worried. But what’s keeping us up at night is Islamic extremist groups, nukes in North Korea and Iran, and the growth of China’s power and influence.

Here is a summary of the survey results:

Pew Research Global Attitudes Project

Click to embiggen.

Is it weird that we’re more worried about North Korea than about global climate change? Oh well, at least we’re more likely to fret about climate change than about America’s power and influence.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Source article:

Americans are more worried about North Korean nukes than climate change

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, global climate change, LG, ONA, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged alo, anchor, asian, climate, global climate change, islamic, korea, latin, major, pakistan, republic, solar panels | Comments Off

China Plans to Regulate Some of Its Carbon Emissions for the First Time Ever

by Andrianayhv Posted on May 23, 2013

Smog in a Beijing neighborhood. Photo: Chris Aston

Next month, China will begin its first carbon-trading pilot program in Shenzhen, a major Chinese city just north of Hong Kong, the Guardian reports. The program will begin modestly, targeting only certain Shenzhen companies, but will soon expand to other sectors and cities. Environmentalists hope these initial trials will help the country determine how to best go about setting caps on emissions, the Guardian writes.

China ranks as the world’s number one carbon dioxide emitter, thanks in part to the massive amounts of coal the country burns. China currently builds a new coal-fired power plant at a rate of about one every week to ten days. The country’s coal burning levels are nearly on par with the rest of the world combined.

Politicians around the world have focused on carbon trading as the market-based strategy of choice for regulating greenhouse gas emissions. HowStuffWorks explains the basic concept:

Cap-and-trade schemes are the most popular way to regulate carbon dioxide (CO2) and other emissions. The scheme’s governing body begins by setting a cap on allowable emissions. It then distributes or auctions off emissions allowances that total the cap. Member firms that do not have enough allowances to cover their emissions must either make reductions or buy another firm’s spare credits. Members with extra allowances can sell them or bank them for future use. Cap-and-trade schemes can be either mandatory or voluntary.

But in the European Union, this system has not worked so well. The Royal Society of Chemistry explains the problem:

In theory, the cost of buying the allowances, either directly from other companies or on the open market, is supposed to provide financial incentives for companies to invest in carbon reducing technology or shift to less carbon intensive energy sources. But after reaching a peak of nearly €30 (£25) per tonne in the summer of 2008, prices have steadily fallen. By January they had crashed to under €5, providing little, if any, financial incentive for companies to reduce emissions.

This initial effort in China will extent to just 638 companies, the Guardian reports, though those businesses are responsible for 68 percent of Shenzhen’s total greenhouse gas emissions. While any efforts China undertakes to reduce its emissions will help ward off global climate change and reduce greenhouse gas build up in the planet’s atmosphere, China’s leaders say the decision primarily stems from it’s escalating in-country problems with air pollution, the Guardian reports.

If things go well, the scheme will further incorporate transportation, manufacturing and construction companies as well. China plans to enroll seven cities in the experiment by 2014. By 2020, China hopes to have implemented a nation-wide carbon control program—just in time for the country’s estimated emissions peak in 2025.

Oklahoma Tornado: Is Climate Change to Blame?

by Curtis Tangredi Posted on May 22, 2013

green4us

The Oklahoma twister was a ‘classic look’, but the data shows we are experiencing more volatility in the US tornado season. Oklahoma National Guard Soldiers and Airmen respond to a devastating tornado that ripped through Moore, Okla., May 20, 2013. (Photo by Sgt. 1st Class Kendall James, Oklahoma National Guard). Global climate change and politics are linked to each other – for better or worse. No clearer was that the case than when Democratic senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island gave an impassioned speech on global warming in the aftermath of Monday’s deadly Oklahoma tornado, and the conservative media ripped him. Whitehouse implied that at least part of the blame for the deadly tornado should be laid at the feet of climate change. Is Whitehouse correct? It’s difficult to assign any one storm’s outcome to the possible effects of global climate change, and the science oftornadoes in particular makes it pretty much impossible to know whether Whitehouse is right. Let’s start with the basics of what causes a tornado. A piece from my friend (and sometimes co-chatter) Andrew Freedman two years ago sets out the basics well. First, you need warm, humid air for moisture. The past few days in Moore have featured temperatures in the upper 70s to low 80s, with relative humidity levels regularly hitting between 90% and 100% and rarely dropping below 70%. Second, you need strong jet stream winds to provide lift. As this map from Weather Underground indicates, there were definitely some very strong jet stream winds on Monday in the Oklahoma region. Photograph: Weather Underground Third, you need strong wind shear (changing wind directions and/or speeds at different heights) to allow for full instability and lift. This mid-level wind shear map from the University of Wisconsin shows that there were 45 to 50 knot winds, right at the top of the scale, over Oklahoma on Monday. University of Wisconsin Fourth, you need something to ignite the storm. In this case, a frontal boundary, as seen in this Weather Channel map, draped across central Oklahoma, did the trick. Weather Channel The point is that all the normal ingredients were there that allowed an EF-4 tornado to spawn and strike. (Examination of the storm site may cause an upgrading to EF-5.) It happened in tornado alley, where warm moist air from the Gulf of Mexico often meets dry air from the north and Rocky mountains for maximum instability. There wasn’t anything shocking about this from a meteorological perspective. It was, as a well-informed friend said, a “classic” look. The long-term weather question is whether or not we’ll see more or less of these “classic” looks in our changing meteorological environment. It turns out that of all the weather phenomena, from droughts to hurricanes, tornadoes are the most complex to answer from a broader atmospheric trends point of view. The reason is that a warming world affects the factors that lead to tornadoes in different ways. Climate change is supposed, among other things, to bring warmer and moister air to earth. That, of course, would lead to more severe thunderstorms and probably more tornadoes. The issue is that global warming is also forecast to bring about less wind shear. This would allow hurricanes to form more easily, but it also would make it much harder for tornadoes to get the full about lift and instability that allow for your usual thunderstorm to grow in height and become a fully-fledged tornado. Statistics over the past 50 years bear this out, as we’ve seen warmer and more moist air as well as less wind shear. Meteorological studies differ on whether or not the warmer and moister air can overcome a lack of wind shear in creating more tornadoes in the far future. In the immediate past, the jet stream, possibly because of climate change, has been quite volatile. Some years it has dug south to allow maximum tornado activity in the middle of the country, while other years it has stayed to the north. Although tornado reporting has in prior decades been not as reliable as today because of a lack of equipment and manpower, it’s still not by accident that the six least active and four most active tornado seasons have been felt over the past decade. Another statistic that points to the irregular patterns is that the three earliest and four latest starts to the tornado season have all occurred in the past 15 years. Basically, we’ve had this push and pull in recent history. Some years the number of tornadoes is quite high, and some years it is quite low. We’re not seeing “average” seasons as much any more, though the average of the extremes has led to no meaningful change to the average number of tornadoes per year. Expect this variation to continue into the future as less wind shear and warmer moister air fight it out. The overall result could very well be fewer days of tornadoes per Harold Brooks of the National Storm Center, but more and stronger tornadoes when they do occur. Nothing about the tornado in Moore, Oklahoma, or tornadoes over the past few decades break with this theory. None of it proves or disproves senator Whitehouse’s beliefs either. Indeed, we’ll never know whether larger global warming factors were at play in Monday’s storms. All we can do at this moment is react to them and give the people of Oklahoma all the help they need.

More –

Oklahoma Tornado: Is Climate Change to Blame?

How Thatcher Made the Conservative Case for Climate Action
Climate Change Could Mean Seven Times As Many Katrinas
Large Rise in CO2 Emissions Sounds Climate Change Alarm
Climate Desk Live: A Conversation With Climate Scientist Michael Mann
How Science Can Predict Where You Stand on Keystone XL

A Friendly Reminder From Pretty Much Every Climate Scientist in the World: Climate Change Is Real

by marsxxzaa Posted on May 16, 2013

For the first time in human history the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has reached 400 parts per million. Photo: Mauna Loa Observatory

There’s an interesting relationship, borne out in polling numbers, between the “general public’s” belief in global climate change and the weather. When it’s hot out, people believe in climate change. When it’s cold, they don’t. When summer heat and drought and wildfires tore through the U.S. last summer, 74 percent of Americans believed that climate change was affecting the weather. Only 46 percent of Americans think that this climate change is caused by human activities – most directly the burning of fossil fuels.

The numbers are a little different when it is climate scientists, and the scientific research conducted on climate change, that are polled.

Writing in the Guardian, Dana Nuccitelli and John Abraham describe a new study that polled the recent research to see what scientists thought of climate change. (Nuccitelli is one of the voices behind the website Skeptical Science and one of the authors of the new scientific study.) They found that the vast, overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree that humans are causing climate change.

The team searched a database of scientific studies for the words “global climate change” or “global warming.” They found 11,944 relevant studies published between 1991 and 2012. Then, they read through the study’s summaries to figure out whether the study supported, rejected, was uncertain about or said nothing at all about our role in causing climate change. They also asked the scientists behind the papers whether their research supported or refuted the idea of man-made global warming.

Of the studies that expressed some sort of position on global warming, of which there were 4,000, the team write in their paper, “97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.” When the climate scientists themselves said whether or not their work supported the idea of anthropogenic climate change, “97.2% endorsed the consensus.”

For the papers that didn’t seem to have an opinion on whether humans were causing climate change, the reason, they write, is not that the scientists don’t know. Rather, it’s that the debate is so fully and completely settled within the scientific community that they aren’t going to use space re-hashing old fights.

Some people may mention that the scientific community is conflicted over the cause of climate change. This new survey would like to remind that that is not true.

Climate-denying GOP rep wants to take science-funding decisions away from scientists

by DenaeTina858 Posted on May 1, 2013

Climate-denying GOP rep wants to take science-funding decisions away from scientists

By John Upton

Rep. Lamar Smith, thinking deeply about science.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), a climate skeptic who somehow became chair of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, wants Congress to meddle in decisions about which science research efforts should get government funding.

Perhaps that’s because scientists have a scary track record of finding out bothersome stuff. Like about climate change and whatnot.

From ScienceInsider:

The new chair of the House of Representatives science committee has drafted a bill that, in effect, would replace peer review at the National Science Foundation (NSF) with a set of funding criteria chosen by Congress. For good measure, it would also set in motion a process to determine whether the same criteria should be adopted by every other federal science agency.

The legislation, being worked up by Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX), represents the latest—and bluntest—attack on NSF by congressional Republicans seeking to halt what they believe is frivolous and wasteful research being funded in the social sciences. Last month, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) successfully attached language to a 2013 spending bill that prohibits NSF from funding any political science research for the rest of the fiscal year unless its director certifies that it pertains to economic development or national security. Smith’s draft bill, called the “High Quality Research Act,” would apply similar language to NSF’s entire research portfolio across all the disciplines that it supports.

The National Science Foundation, which has a $7 billion annual budget, funds a wide variety of research on climate change, among many other topics. From an NSF climate change report [PDF]:

NSF funding through the decades has led to many of the most fundamental discoveries and advances in human knowledge about the causes and consequences of global climate change and variability. Paleoclimate records, computational climate models, and economic models of climate change are just some examples of the major contributions of NSF’s investments in this area.

Fortunately, with Barack Obama in the White House and Democrats in control of the Senate, maneuvers like this generally turn out to be little more than time-wasting chest-thumping by anti-science charlatans. So long as that is the case, American scientists can continue to further our understanding of how fossil-fuel addiction is recasting our environment — and what we could do about it.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Link to original –

Climate-denying GOP rep wants to take science-funding decisions away from scientists

Posted in Anchor, ATTRA, FF, G & F, GE, global climate change, ONA, Pines, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged article, global climate change, house, nsf, Ona, research, solar power, white | Comments Off

Keystone XL oil would be processed in sick East Texas community

by ild4sho Posted on April 29, 2013

Keystone XL oil would be processed in sick East Texas community

By John Upton

Tar Sands Blockade

Children play at a park in front of a Valero refinery in Houston, Texas.

For many, the battle over the Keystone XL pipeline is about national energy strategy and global climate change.

For residents of the Manchester neighborhood in Houston, it’s also about what will be processed and spewed into the air in their backyards.

Activist Doug Fahlbusch recently brought some attention to the community when he held up a sign at a Valero-sponsored golf tournament that said, “TAR SANDS SPILL. ANSWER MANCHESTER.” That protest got him carried away from the links by security guards and arrested.

What did Fahlbusch mean? Why are he and his colleagues at Tar Sands Blockade so concerned about Manchester?

Yes! magazine reporter Kristin Moe took a trip to the embattled neighborhood, where a refinery owned by Valero Energy Corp. could end up processing most of the tar-sands oil that flows south through the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. Here is a little of what Moe found in “Houston’s most polluted neighborhood”:

Yudith Nieto, 24, has lived in Manchester since her family came from Mexico when she was a small child. While it’s OK to visit the playground, she says, it’s not OK to bring her camera. On several occasions, security guards from the Valero refinery next door have appeared and asked her to leave, claiming that taking pictures in the park was “illegal.” They’ve even brought in Houston police as reinforcements. Valero, one of the major oil companies operating in this industrial part of Houston, keeps its security busy: Nieto says that they have harassed documentary filmmakers and journalists. And when college students participating in an “alternative spring break” program came to the park to talk to her about the neighborhood’s problems, a guard drove up in an unmarked vehicle and took video of the meeting on his cellphone. “I’m not afraid of the attention I’m getting from these people,” Nieto says, “because we want people to know that we’re aware.”

Manchester, one of Houston’s oldest neighborhoods, is surrounded by industry on all sides: a Rhodia chemical plant; a car crushing facility; a water treatment plant; a train yard for hazardous cargo; a Goodyear synthetic rubber plant; oil refineries belonging to Lyondell Basell, Valero, and Texas Petro-Chemicals; as well as one of the busiest highways in the city. Industrial development continues uninterrupted down the Houston Ship Channel for another 50 miles south to the Gulf of Mexico. The refineries around Houston have been called the “keystone to Keystone” because they’re expected to process 90 percent of tar sands crude from Alberta [PDF] if the controversial Keystone XL pipeline is completed.

It’s one of the most polluted neighborhoods in the U.S., one where smokestacks grace every backyard view. But it’s taking on a new significance as the terminus of Keystone because the pipeline is at the center of the highest-stakes environmental battle in recent years. As international pressure builds, residents are beginning to organize, educate themselves, and speak out for the health of their families. …

Manchester is in some ways typical of low-income urban neighborhoods: it’s almost entirely Latino and African American, with a large number of undocumented immigrants. A full third of residents live below the poverty line. Drugs, unemployment, and gangs are a problem. And there’s a strange smell in the air: sometimes sweet, sometimes sulfurous, often reeking of diesel. The most striking thing is that people here always seem to be sick. They have chronic headaches, nosebleeds, sore throats, and red sores on their skin that take months to heal.

Manchester is where the tar-sands rubber will hit the ground. Or where the bitumen will hit the air, if you will. To learn more about the community’s battles against Valero and Keystone XL, read the full article in Yes!

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

Climate & Energy

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Read this article:

Keystone XL oil would be processed in sick East Texas community

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, global climate change, ONA, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged Drugs, g & f, global climate change, keystone, major, mexico, politics, sands | Comments Off

GreenEnergy4.us

Sustainable products for best planet practices

Tag Archives: global climate change

Californians Want to Fix the Drought—Without Spending Any Money

The Pope Says We Should Probably Get on Stopping Climate Change

Instead of Being Protected, Antarctica’s Oceans Will Be Open for Fishing

Americans are more worried about North Korean nukes than climate change

Americans are more worried about North Korean nukes than climate change

Also in Grist

China Plans to Regulate Some of Its Carbon Emissions for the First Time Ever

Oklahoma Tornado: Is Climate Change to Blame?

Related Posts

Share this:

A Friendly Reminder From Pretty Much Every Climate Scientist in the World: Climate Change Is Real

Climate-denying GOP rep wants to take science-funding decisions away from scientists

Climate-denying GOP rep wants to take science-funding decisions away from scientists

Also in Grist

Keystone XL oil would be processed in sick East Texas community

Keystone XL oil would be processed in sick East Texas community

Also in Grist

Hosting

For the best website hosting with full support DreamHost is the best. They even have dedicated hosting for wordpress, DreamPress!

Check it out now

Ohm

Eden

Libros

ITUNES TV AND MOVIES

FTC Disclaimer

Sustainable Luxury

Clean Water

Spring is for Gardening

Green Power

Green Energy

Aero Garden

Natural Pest Control

FTC Disclosure

Greenreflection on Twitter

Start Plants from Seed!

Heirloom Tomatoes