A recent article posted by Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB), titled “Climate change will keep hitting Oregonians hard, but the exact impact will depend on where you live,” claims that Oregon will be impacted severely on multiple fronts by climate change. Areas of concern include increased wildfires, sea level rise, and water shortages, among others. This is mostly false, as many of the problems listed are not worsening and those that are have nothing to do with climate change.
OPB writes that different regions of Oregon will face different effects from climate change, which is reasonable; coastal communities will have to worry about sea level more than those in Eastern Oregon, for example. But the caveats listed by OPB are interesting. The story doesn’t just discuss geographic and natural climate differences, but also differing effects based on demographics, such as, “how many people live there, and how much money their local governments have on hand.” Those two variables, and others like population growth and relative incomes, are totally independent of long-term climate change and even short-term weather events.
Regardless, the article goes on to make several false claims regarding the direct effects of climate change:
“The Oregon Coast faces sea-level rise, algal blooms and shellfish biotoxins. The northern Willamette Valley faces heat waves, higher landslide risks and increased water demands as the population grows. Northeastern Oregon faces longer fire seasons, scorched crops and increasing numbers of destructive pests.”
For the sake of brevity, we will not go into each in assertion made in this post, but almost every one of these supposed hazards are overblown at best, and or simply not occurring, at worst.
Beginning with sea level rise, the average absolute sea level rise globally is about 1.7+/-0.3 millimeters per year. Two out of the five available National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sea level monitoring stations in Oregon are slightly above that rate, at 1.78 +/- 0.58 and 2.52 +/- 0.61 mm/year or The rest are below the average global rate. These rates equate to a rise of about 0.58 ft and 0.83 ft over the course of 100 years, respectively (See chart below).
Monitoring stations at Port Orford and Astoria both show negative sea level rise, which means land is likely rising faster than absolute sea levels, making a net drop in relative sea level.
These are hardly unmanageable rates of change, the regions affected have plenty of time to react to less than 3 mm per year. Even the highest rate of sea level rise measured by NOAA in Oregon is well below the 1.4 to 2.75 feet of average global sea level rise forecast by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its most recent report.
This is not the first time OPD has made false claims about heat waves, increased water demand, scorched crops, and pests. Climate Realism previously debunked these threats to Oregon agriculture in “Relax Oregon, Climate Change Is Not Increasing Drought, Flooding or Heatwaves,” and in “No, OPB, Climate Change is Not Taking a Toll on Oregon Farmers,” the latter showing that not only has precipitation not been a problem for the state, but crop production has been increasing, with an upsurge of major crops produced almost every year. Hazelnut production, for example, exploded 149 percent since 1999.
Regarding wildfire, OPB reports that Oregonians say it’s harder to go hiking and other outdoors activities because of wildfire smoke and heat. Again, the data does not support the anecdotal claims of select hikers cited in OPB’s story. In this case, the perception of hikers simply doesn’t match reality. Except for two years of outliers in 2020 and 2021, the Oregon Department of Forestry’s own data show that there has not been any trend in wildfire burn acreage. (See figure below)
Oregonians are not under increasing threat from climate change, even if they feel like they are. In this case, their reported experience of suffering the effects of climate change is more likely due to media coverage wrongfully attributing every period of unpleasant weather or wildfire to climate change, and not because these phenomena are actually worsening. OPB is a big part of the problem, pushing the false narrative that a climate crisis occurring in Oregon. A quick search of their website shows more than 7,000 results for the term “climate change.” Hiding or obfuscating the real data, which shows the unalarming truth about modest climate change, is journalistic malfeasance. OPB should quit misleading its audience. The best evidence, in the form of real-world data, show that Oregonians face no climate crisis.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Portland is home to the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA). Is is funded by BPA and the utilities to promote energy efficiency to combat climate change. They have been promoting this crap in the building industry for 20+ years.
Nothing wrong with a building being energy efficient as long as it isn’t required to use only “green” energy.
As a builder in Oregon I can assure you you’re incorrect. Building codes today completely ignore the concept of the law of diminishing returns and as a builder I am throwing away thousands of dollars via over-insulating that will never be paid back. Additionally, the code has upped the requirement for wind-resistance requirements due to the belief that winds will increase. Here on the coast I now need to design a building for 135 mph winds instead of 110 mph. Conservative estimate is that cost an additional $5k for my last home build. HVAC standards have changed as well.
This is easily $10k per house and Oregon is presently in the process of upping these requirements on their own and they aren’t getting input from industry professionals so I expect the next round of changes will add thousands more with no benefit and may not even be buildable.
Being energy efficient is not necessarily the same as over-insulating. It means being REASONABLY insulated. So your assurance that I was incorrect was incorrect. 🙂
Both of you sound very reasonable. And I agree.
Beers all around, please. 🤠
Oregon has a relatively mild client- so over dosing on insulation does seem crazy. And too much might reduce ventilation, when not done smartly. The other increases that state calls for also seem unreasonable. No wonder there’s a housing shortage across much of America- what with excess building codes, a desire to stop forestry, driving up wood prices, higher energy costs driving up the cost of all other materials needed for construction, too much land being locked up for various reasons, some not reasonable- and, open borders. So, the housing shortage happens especially in states that welcome illegal immigrants. MA now spends a billion/year to help the migrants here. This state is now a 2 language state. Call almost any government agency or insurance company, etc. and the first thing they’ll ask is what language you speak. When the state agencies does webinars, they later upload them to YouTube in about 20 languages! Of course, a housing shortage means higher home prices which is just fine by me. My home value has gone up a lot in the past 2 years. I’m about 75 miles from Boston- but what with Covid and how people like working from home and the absurdly high home prices along the coast- high housing prices are now pushing inland. I hope the value of my home keeps going up. If migrants can’t afford to live here- they can always move to Alabama or Mississippi.
Call for an interpreter at the welfare office yesterday, someone came in speaking english.
We should always seek ways to make improvements. It is good conservation. It is good economics.
It is forcing only one way down everyone’s throats without even a handwaving effort of analysis of alternatives or recognizing economic evolution as a real phenomenon is the problem.
Wokeachusetts is slowly pushing the forestry folks to practice “climate smart forestry” – where all cutting will be lighter and less often. They are insane and I tell them that almost daily.
The Fourth Estate has become a Fifth Column.
Increasing threat from “climate agendas“…. just like everywhere else.
I was born here in 1944. We almost hit the highest September temperature of that year this week. Not quite, though. And it will be cooler from now on. History is your best teacher – if you ignore it, it will bite you in the ass.
The Democrats would love to expand the public broadcasting model to the rest of the failing mainstream media. Taxpayer beware!
Very nice Linnea.
More people die from temperature-related causes in Oregon in the winter than in the summer.
It is so cold there that all the houses and apartments are heated.
Oregon has a temperate climate that gets much more polar weather than tropical weather.
Two long running tide gauges Astoria OR since 1925 and
Crescent City CA since 1933 encapsulate the Oregon coast.
Both have negative rates of sea level rise:
Astoria -0.14 mm/yr
Crescent City -0.76 mm/yr
Source
North America is tipping into the Atlantic.
Australia is tipping into the Timor Sea to the north of Australia.
Interesting that Oregon uplift is outpacing sea level rise. Nothing dredging cannot fix for now.
When the sea level eventually falls, Oregon is going to need more dredging.
I first visited Oregon in the fall of 1970, and many times since. If I retraced that 1970s trip – north along the coast from CA, Crater Lake and a night at Diamond Lake. Then over to Burns, and on to Boise, ID.
It seems to be the same as it was 54 years ago. April Ehrlich, the reporter will not have that perspective assuming the photo on the Web is recent.
What Oregon residents are being hit hard by is inflation, homelessness, meth and fentanyl.
The law against opium and opiates that was passed in 1914, the Harrison Narcotics Act, was to protect the alcohol and tobacco companies from competition from opium and its derivatives, there were no opium or opiate deaths recorded in the Mortality Statistics of the CDC until 7 years AFTER the law was passed.
Opium bars had opened it all the major cities. Opium was about as addictive as alcohol but users didn’t get drunk or have hangovers, it was also more pleasant than tobacco.
That law cost 10s of millions of US lives due to lung cancer from smoking tobacco in the US alone.
The CDC wasn’t founded until 1946. As far as opium bars “opened in all major cities,” I’d like to see a link or reference to support that, including time and date.
I do not know about “all of the major cities,” but there were quite a few.
Coca Cola was infused with cocaine.
7-up was infused with lithium.
We had a predictive baseline; The Chinese had a (forced) trial period of relatively unrestricted ‘opium bars’.
We decided it was a bad idea.
The “bad idea” cost 10s of millions of US lives due to lung cancer from smoking tobacco.
Before aspirin was invented everyone with access used opium for pain without the deaths we see today from fentanyl.
Fentanyl that has to be injected by most because it is so expensive and injected often because of its short action, both which are recipes for overdoses and deaths.
Big Government at its worst.
Are you saying that unrestricted and easy access to opium stops people from smoking?
And political corruption.
I suggest too many in the MSM- are just to stupid to write something original- it’s all so easy to write a climate emergency/disaster story.
Ad revenues via ad clicks.
Good news is bad news. No news is bad news. Bad news is good news.
The majority of the tide gauges on the Oregon / Washington coast should show negative due to land rise caused by the Juan De Fuca plate subducting along the Cascadia fault zone. The big concern should be when it ruptures and the coast shifts westward 20~40 feet and down 10 feet! Oh and that pesky ground shaking might cause some issues also! I love my coast but will not live on it until the overdue big one hits!
Many media people seem to think that whatever comes out of their overworked mouths is true.
I have professional experience in several areas where I am at least competent. Every time I see a media report on one of these subjects, they are inaccurate on one or more significant aspects. The farther afield from their experience, the less accurate the assertion.
In areas where I do not have much knowledge, my only logical conclusion is that they are also wrong. That’s why I ignore them.
Not just Oregon.
I’m a 70 yr old, lifelong Oregonian. I still snow ski, golf and visit the coast.
In all of the decades of doing so there is not a shred of change to be observed.
So when will we actually see the leading edge any change at all?
The beaches are all as they were when I lived on the coast from infant to 3rd grade.
The mountain snow has the same annual varied depths as always.
I have worked in the construction/building industry and the weather is the same as it always has been.
The mendacious claims by climate crusaders have become worse than merely deceit. Their continued pitch is pure corruption.
I am seeing (maybe my imagination) more douglas fir growth annually.
So, the windstorms that cause the big hyped events might happen ‘more often’ if the trees grow too fast. 🙂