HinesSight

Climate change trends in Oregon discussed at Salem City Club

Truth is preferable to falsehood, for sure. But it can be damn depressing at times. That's how I felt today while listening to a Salem City Club talk about climate change from an Oregon perspective.

The speaker was Erica Fleishmann, Professor, College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, who is the Director of the Climate Change Research Institute (CCRI), a network of researchers and professionals that is housed at Oregon State University in Fleishmann's college.

One of CCRI's missions is to research and monitor the state and regional climate. Every two years CCRI publishes an updated Oregon Climate Assessment. The 2025 assessment can be downloaded via the CCRI web site. There's a two-page Executive Summary. This is the not-so-cheery section on Temperature and Precipitation.

Temperature and precipitation. Oregon’s annual average temperature increased by 2.2°F per century since 1895. Without considerable reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, annual temperature in Oregon is projected to increase by at least 5°F by 2074 and 7.6°F by 2100, with the greatest seasonal increases in summer. Precipitation is projected to increase during winter and decrease during summer, and the intensity of heavy winter precipitation events is projected to increase. Furthermore, the proportion of precipitation falling as rain rather than snow is expected to increase. Increases in extreme temperatures contributed to recent revisions of the national Plant Hardiness Zone Map.

This is the section on Drought.

During 18 of the years from 1999–2023, Oregon’s precipitation was below average. The average temperature was warmer than normal in 21 of those years, which contributed to higher rates of evapotranspiration and more-frequent drought. Drought risk likely will increase over the twenty-
first century on the western slopes of the Cascade Range and the southern Coast Range, decrease in the Deschutes and John Day basins in north-central Oregon, and change little elsewhere. Drought risk during summer is likely to increase statewide.

Fleishmann showed some slides that echo the most recent Oregon Climate Assessment. 

The red bars on the chart above indicate periods between 1950 and the present when the annual average temperature in Oregon was greater than the 1950-2014 baseline. It's clear that the early part of this period had mostly blue bars, meaning a temperature less than the baseline, while more recent years have been largely above the baseline.

From here on out, the orange'y shadings show various warming scenarios, with the most likely being an 8 degree increase over the baseline by 2100 in the annual average temperature .

You can see that from 1990 to 2020, Salem averaged 15 days a year with a heat index of 90 degrees or above. The index is a blend of temperature and humidity, but since our summers usually aren't humid, Fleishmann said that the heat index basically is based on temperature.


The projected extreme heat index for 2070-2099, when, thankfully, I'll be dead and gone, shows that Salem is expected to have 53 days a year of 90 degrees or above, over three times what we have now.

Regarding precipitation, there isn't as clear a trend as there is with temperature. There have been more drier than normal years since 2000 compared to wetter than normal years. The long term trend is very uncertain, as shown by the large width of the right side of the slide. By 2100 the most likely scenario is a fairly small increase in annual precipitation, around 7-8 percent.

However, some areas are expected to get an increase in extreme precipitation.

More precipitation is expected to fall as rain rather than snow in those mountainous regions. 

Another slide showed how the causes of wildfires differ in various parts of Oregon. Most wildfires on the west side of the Cascades are caused by humans, while most wildfires on the east side of the Cascades are caused by lightning.

In the Q&A part of the program, Fleishmann said that carbon capture is still in the research and development stage so won't be able to quickly reduce greenhouse gases; that while Oregon is warming, we're better off than some other areas, like Arizona, so may see some climate-caused migration to our state; that while climate change initiatives are being rolled back at the national level, we will continue to stand with like-minded states; that frequent wildfire smoke inhalation has some negative long-term health effects, including premature birth.

Should progressives pursue policies of abundance? Probably.

I identify as a progressive, though for me, the term basically is synonymous with liberal. At any rate, I'd call myself a moderate progressive/liberal.

Meaning, I'm not as far to the left as Bernie Sanders, though I agree with much of what he says and stands for, and I'm not as far to the right as John Fetterman, though I also like much of what he says and stands for. 

So it isn't surprising that I resonate with the general thrust of a recently published book by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, Abundance. In fact, I just ordered the book. Here's the Amazon description.

From bestselling authors and journalistic titans Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, Abundance is a once-in-a-generation, paradigm-shifting call to renew a politics of plenty, face up to the failures of liberal governance, and abandon the chosen scarcities that have deformed American life.

 

To trace the history of the twenty-first century so far is to trace a history of unaffordability and shortage. After years of refusing to build sufficient housing, America has a national housing crisis. After years of limiting immigration, we don’t have enough workers. Despite decades of being warned about the consequences of climate change, we haven’t built anything close to the clean-energy infrastructure we need. Ambitious public projects are finished late and over budget—if they are ever finished at all. The crisis that’s clicking into focus now has been building for decades—because we haven’t been building enough.

Abundance explains that our problems today are not the results of yesteryear’s villains. Rather, one generation’s solutions have become the next gener­ation’s problems. Rules and regulations designed to solve the problems of the 1970s often prevent urban-density and green-energy projects that would help solve the problems of the 2020s. Laws meant to ensure that government considers the consequences of its actions have made it too difficult for government to act consequentially. In the last few decades, our capacity to see problems has sharpened while our ability to solve them has diminished.

Progress requires facing up to the institutions in life that are not working as they need to. It means, for liberals, recognizing when the government is failing. It means, for conservatives, recognizing when the government is needed. In a book exploring how we can move from a liberalism that not only protects and pre­serves but also builds, Klein and Thompson trace the political, economic, and cultural barriers to progress and propose a path toward a politics of abundance. At a time when movements of scarcity are gaining power in country after country, this is an answer that meets the challenges of the moment while grappling honestly with the fury so many rightfully feel.

 

Klein was on Bill Maher's HBO show this week. Maher hasn't been shy about criticizing California's overregulation, appropriately griping about how it took him three years, I think it was, to get approval for a solar panel installation on his house.

 

There was talk about how California has been trying to get high speed rail installed between Los Angeles and San Francisco for, roughly, forever. Now the plan is just for a segment between Merced and Bakersfield, if I recall correctly. Whoopee.

 

China has been able to build high speed rail hugely faster, as has the European Union. It does seem that Abundance is correct: the United States has lost its ability to build great things. Being old, and having grown up in California, I remember how quickly the interstate highway system in that state was built after a bill was passed by Congress in 1956.

 

Driving from central to southern California used to be really slow. Going through cities like Bakersfield involved stopping at lots of red lights. Once the I-5 freeway was built, and that didn't take very long, the trip was much faster and more pleasant. 

 

Here in Oregon, I'm a defender of our pioneering land use laws that protect farm and forest land from urban sprawl. But the downside is that our state lacks enough affordable housing. As was discussed on the Bill Maher show, blue states like California, New York, and Oregon likely will lose House seats after the 2030 census to rapidly growing red states like Texas and Florida.

 

Housing affordability is one reason. Red states have fewer regulations. Klein noted that this has caused Texas to have a lot of wind and solar electrical generation, even though the political climate in that state is anti-environment. The reason, according to Klein, is that the lack of regulation means green energy projects are easier to build in Texas.

 

Somehow us liberals have to find a way to build things that the United States needs without having construction slowed or even halted by onerous regulations. There's got to be a middle way between allowing development to proceed without necessary oversight, which the Trump administration is pursuing, and putting roadblocks in the path of development through over-regulation, which Democrat-controlled areas have been prone to.

 

The New York Times has a thoughtful review of Abundance, "Can Democrats Learn to Dream Big Again?" You should be able to read the review via my gift link. Excerpt:

As Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson write in “Abundance,” a guide for liberals shaken by an age of factional polarization, the United States can still blaze the path to progress, but only if progressives get out of the habit of putting obstacles in their own way. “If liberals do not want Americans to turn to the false promise of strongmen,” the authors write, “they need to offer the fruits of effective government.” But how?

Klein, a columnist and podcaster for The New York Times, and Thompson, a journalist for The Atlantic, are the best in the business at digesting and synthesizing expertise from a host of fields. “Abundance” expands on their previously published work over the last decade or so, and Klein and Thompson have no shortage of policy proposals on affordable housing (build more!), renewable energy (go nuclear!) and sustainable agriculture (vertical farming?).

But their book comprises more than a set of concrete steps to fix specific socioeconomic problems in America. It’s mainly a sharp cry against myopic Democrats who block new ideas and govern through checklists, leading to what the authors call “an endless catalog of rules and restraints.”

 

Artificial Intelligence explained to City Club by Willamette University professor

Last Friday Calvin Deutschbein, Assistant Professor of Computer Science at Willamette University, gave a talk on Artificial Intelligence, otherwise known as AI, to the Salem City Club. Deutschbein is holding a microphone in the photo below.

He started off by talking about intelligence in general. It has something to do with (1) representing the world, (2) finding patterns, (3) predicting the future, (4) acting optimally. His example pertained to his cat. I'll adapt it to our dog.

Mooka, our Husky mix, clearly is adept at making sense of the world. After all, ever since dogs became domesticated, probably via ancestral wolves who learned how to benefit from a relationship with humans, dogs have become highly attuned to living with us. 

Mooka knows that most days I take her for a walk in the late afternoon. She's learned that when the sun begins to set (and her stomach feels empty), the pattern is that soon I'll be putting her leash on. To get her to come to the front door, I get a few small pieces of cheese from the refrigerator. As soon as I open the cheese container, Mooka appears. That's non-artificial intelligence.

An AI model doesn't have the form of general intelligence that dogs, cats, and people do. That may come in the not-too-distant future, but for now AI models like Chat GPT basically are simply predicting the likelihood of words. That's why they're called Large Language Models.

Deutschbein used Willamette _______ as an example. The blank could be Valley, Forest, University, or some other word. Given the context of where he works, Willamette University is most likely. Often the next word would be Is: Willamette University is _________. Members of the audience threw out possibilities for the next word, which his slide indicated was Located: Willamette University is located ________.

We know that "in Salem" likely would be the next words. But Deutschbein noted that for most Americans, the word following Salem would have a greater chance of being Massachusetts than Oregon, given the famous nature of the East Coast Salem and its witch trials. Yet to the City Club audience, Oregon would be the chosen word, because of the context.

A slide said, "The amount of surprise you experience depends on correlations between concepts in a context." Another slide explained what this means:

Based on my personal experience, I might believe in an equal chance of the word "cat" and the word "dog" in the following sentence: "I am a _______ person." However, if I observe more "cat" than "dog" when reading a text, I am surprised by a mathematically quantifiable amount. Computers can make reasonable predictions by minimizing this type of surprise.

This probably seems like a far cry from genuine human intelligence. Which, it is. That's why Large Language Models currently are "merely" very good at predicting the next word(s) in a statement, as shown in the slide below. (That merely downplays how powerful this capability is.)


Regarding neural networks, which attempt to mimic how the human brain works, as a long-time (unsuccessful) meditator, I liked Deutschbein's comment: "When neurons fire, I have a thought; when they don't, I'm happy."

In the Q & A part of the program he was asked about so-called alternative facts, and whether AI models could recognize such concepts. He answered that these models are not trained to be true or useful, just to predict the most likely words. 

After the talk I went up to Deutschbein and told him that I'd read an article in a science magazine about the AI model developed by researchers in China that caused quite a stir when it had many or most of the capabilities of Chat GPT, but was much more efficient, requiring way less computer power.

I said that the researchers were surprised when the model started to arrive at answers to questions put to it by using a combination of Chinese and English, something they hadn't expected. The article quoted other AI experts as being concerned that at some point AI models might leave human languages behind, either "thinking" in pure mathematics or creating their own language with concepts we wouldn't be able to recognize. 

Deutschbein didn't seem very concerned about this, which was reassuring. I told him that given how amazingly complex the human brain is, with its 80 billion or so neurons bound together by trillions of interconnections, it's a neuroscientific fact that when we have a thought or feeling, or make a decision, what produced that output is a mystery to our conscious self.

So, I said, I guess it isn't all that bothersome that AI models are similar: we can recognize their response to a question posed to them, yet have no clue about how they arrived at that response. Of course, if an AI model ever gets control of nuclear weapon launch codes, there's going to be a really good reason why this is bothersome. 

My fall into a creek shows why doing one thing at a time makes sense

Yesterday I fell off a bridge into running water. Fortunately, it was a tiny bridge and the water wasn't very deep. How it appears to have happened contains a life lesson.

Yesterday I was taking our dog, Mooka, on her usual late afternoon walk, which begins on our property in rural south Salem. I had her on a leash, since the area by a creek is favored by raccoons, and we don't want Mooka running off and tangling with one.

I'd just crossed a little bridge that crosses the main part of Spring Creek, a short creek that feeds Spring Lake. The photo above shows the scene of my fall, a second bridge that crosses a smaller creek that only has considerable water in it after heavy rains.

Mooka was in the lead as I started to walk across the bridge, turning my head to the right to observe the mini-waterfall on the usually mostly dry smaller creek. (The waterfall is the splash of white past the ferns on the left side of the creek.)

Then I suddenly found myself falling off the bridge on the downstream (left) side. Best I can figure out is that as my attention was focused on the mini-waterfall, Mooka had started to pull on the leash I was holding, as she always does when our dog prepares to jog up some stone steps leading away from the creek.

I must have reached out to a snag that was the rotting remains of a tree that used to grow just past the bridge, but had lost most of its trunk in an ice storm, if I remember correctly. The snag pulled out of the ground, falling into the creek just before I did.

Here you can see the snag laying in the creek. Fortunately, I missed it, toppling into the water instead. As falls go, it was a fairly elegant one. I'd let go of the leash, so Mooka wasn't affected. I was wearing high topped boots, so I didn't twist my ankle.

I just climbed back onto the bridge and looked for the dog. But first I had to deal with my Apple Watch beeping loudly.

It had registered that I'd fallen and had started a 30-second countdown, I think it was, until 911 was called (I had my iPhone with me, so I assume that's how the call would be made). I was able to cancel the 911 call just in time, after first pressing "No" on my watch's screen, then realizing the question was Do you want to cancel the 911 call? and I needed to press "Yes." 

Over on my Church of the Churchless blog I'd recently written a post about how scientists have measured how quickly human cognition works, finding that it is amazingly slow at 10 bits per second. One of the lessons, said the researchers, was that the mind can only do one thing at a time.

That was my problem, I believe. My attention had been split between walking across the bridge with a dog leash in my hand just as the dog was pulling on the leash to get up the stone steps, while I was looking at the mini waterfall. 

All that combined to throw me off balance. I suspect that if I hadn't been looking at the waterfall, I would have done what I usually do, walk faster to keep up with the dog. But I had slowed to inspect the rare waterfall.

Anyway, I didn't suffer from my tumble into the creek. I just had to walk in soggy shoes and socks the rest of the way. From now on I'll try to do a bit better with the One Thing at a Time notion.

Typepad told me they aren't going out of business. Hope that's true.

I've been blogging with Typepad since 2003, which is when Wikipedia says Typepad launched. So I must have been one of their earliest customers. Now I have three Typepad blogs.

So while I've gotten used to fairly frequent Typepad outages as problems with the blogging service have become more common, when I couldn't log in to my account on March 3, I got more concerned than usual.

Even though things were back to normal by the next day (which for Typepad is still pretty crappy, especially when it comes to uploading photos, as this person complained about in 2022), I felt the need to send Typepad a support ticket that said:

The Typepad outage yesterday spurred me to do some Googling about Typepad. I saw that you haven't accepted new customers since 2020 and may not be in business much longer. Hopefully that isn't true.

But if it is, I sure hope you guys will have a plan for those of us who have been with Typepad almost from the start, 2003. In those 22 years I've made about 8,300 posts on my three blogs. It's just overwhelming for me to think about losing all that content, which includes many personal experiences, since I partly use blogging as a form of a diary.

So I've got posts about deaths in the family, my granddaughter's birth, health problems, joys and sorrows, all that stuff. It's all under a Typepad URL, so if you go away, so does my ability to retrieve those posts.

I'm simply asking what I hope you're already planning to do in case Typepad goes out of business. Please seriously consider a plan to keep the posts of people like me available. I'm not computer savvy enough to know what this might be. I just know that I'd be willing to pay more to preserve that content, as I'm confident other Typepad users would be.

The response I got made me feel better, though it wasn't totally reassuring.

Hi Brian,

Thanks for your message. Although Typepad is no longer accepting new sign-ups, we continue to support our existing customers and there are no plans for that to change. If it were to change at some point, there would likely be a tool to help bloggers migrate to another platform. However, as mentioned, there is no plan at this time to shut down Typepad, and the Support team are still here for you.

Thanks,
Laura

I replied with:

Laura, thanks much for your positive response. I feel better now. The notion of a tool to help us bloggers migrate to another platform sounds great. Seems like that would benefit both the other platform (new customers!) and Typepad bloggers (no need to get degree in computer science!). Hopefully it won't come to that. I feel a large sense of gratitude to Typepad for sticking around since 2003, which I like to refer to as several hundred years in Internet Years, given the rapidity of change since that time. Of course, that's when I began blogging, which makes me a several hundred year old blogger -- a bit more than my actual ancient age of 76.

Quite a while ago, maybe as many as ten years, I looked into converting my many thousands of blog posts into a WordPress format. It turned out that this would be very difficult to do, if not impossible, so I gave up on that idea.

This helps explain why I felt so good about Typepad support saying they hope to offer a tool to help bloggers migrate to another platform if it came to that. I'd hate to lose not only the text of my posts, but also all of the photos, files, comments, and such that have been part of my 8,300 posts. 

Laurel Hines, my wife, supports changes to Oregon's Death With Dignity law

The Oregon legislature is considering a bill, SB 1003, that would make changes to our state's Death With Dignity law -- which allows people who have six months or less left to live to exercise control over the time and manner of their death by taking physician-prescribed medication.

Passed by Oregon voters in 1994, and affirmed in 1997 when it took effect after a legal challenge, the law is a good start, but it needs improving. That's why my wife, Laurel Hines, testified in favor of SB 1003 at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on March 3.

Laurel told the committee that it makes sense to allow physician assistants and nurse practitioners to deal with patients who want to make use of the Death With Dignity law. In many rural parts of Oregon, PAs and NPs are the primary caregivers, since physicians are lacking in those areas. 

She also approved of a proposed change that reduces the waiting period to use the law from 15 days to 2 days, telling the committee that a 15 day wait after deciding on a peaceful death could be intolerable, and it prolongs the patient's emotional agony. Further, some people lose the ability to self-administer the medication over a 15 day period (that's a requirement under the law).

My wife was quoted in a couple of news stories about the hearing. Here's an excerpt from a story in The Lund Report (an independent publication focused on health care in Oregon), "Senators hear passionate arguments over how terminally ill patients end their lives in Oregon."

How easy should it be for terminally ill people to end their lives? Debate over how Oregon should answer that question is flaring in Salem.

A group of doctors want to cut the waiting period for Oregon’s Death with Dignity law from 15 days to 48 hours and allow not just physicians but nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe medication and oversee the process that allows terminally ill patients to end their lives.

Critics say the changes will remove safeguards voters were promised when they approved Oregon’s physician-assisted dying law in 1994 and affirmed in 1997. Supporters, however, say the law needs an update in response to doctor shortages and for patients who are on the brink of death.

“I believe that these changes that are being proposed are not radical at all, and extremely reasonable,” Laurel Hines, a retired Salem social worker, told lawmakers Monday.

Lawmakers considered those arguments during a hearing of Senate Bill 1003, which would make the most far-reaching revisions to Oregon’s Death with Dignity program in the history of the law.

Hines said that Oregon’s law is modest compared to what’s in place in Canada and other countries. Without reforms to Oregon’s law, she said more people would turn to “do-it-yourself options.”

“I now have traumatic memories of my sister dying the way she did, and being in the condition she was and in pain that morphine didn't control and her loss of autonomy."

The Portland Oregonian also had a story that mentioned Laurel, "Bill to ease medically assisted suicide runs into wall of opposition." 
Download Bill to ease medically assisted suicide runs into wall of opposition

The bill would loosen Oregon’s first-in-the-nation law by reducing the standard waiting period after patients ask for lethal doses of medication from 15 days to two days. Among other provisions, it would eliminate the need for two doctors to sign off on medically assisted suicide and instead allow two physician assistants or nurse practitioners to do so.

No individual lawmakers have signed on as sponsors of Senate Bill 1003, which was filed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Only two people spoke in favor of the bill Monday. Eight people spoke in opposition, along with 150 Oregonians who submitted written testimony objecting to the bill.

Dr. Paul Kaplan, who said he was speaking for a group of about 30 mostly retired doctors who’ve focused on end-of-life care, told the committee the bill would help reduce inequities in rural Oregon where most residents use physician assistants or nurse practitioners for their medical care.

“There are very large areas of Oregon where there is not a doctor available for hundreds of miles,” Kaplan said. “And so this service is literally not available to patients who live in those areas.”

Laurel Hines, a Salem resident, told the committee that sometimes waiting 15 days is too long. Hines said her sister deteriorated within a few days of going into hospice and would not have been able to self-administer a lethal dose — as required by Oregon law. Though Hines’ sister died in Illinois, where there is no medically assisted suicide law, Hines used her sister’s death as an example of what can happen to terminally ill patients.

“I now have traumatic memories of my sister dying the way she did and being in the condition that she was and pain that morphine didn’t control,” Hines said.

It seems that many or even most of the 150 comments in opposition to the bill likely came from an organized effort by Oregon Right to Life. Laurel read the comments and told me that there was talk about the horror of killing unborn children, though abortion obviously has nothing to do with the Death With Dignity law. Most of those opponents probably hadn't even read SB 1003, so hopefully their comments will be discounted by the committee.

Ukrainian refugee speaks at Salem City Club on day Trump insults Ukraine

The timing was coincidental.

Still, yesterday it was jarring for me to leave for the noon Salem City Club program on "Finding Home in a New Culture and Country" after learning the news about how Trump and Vance had insulted Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, which really was an insult to the entire country, only to find that one of the program speakers was Kseniia Hnatovska, a Ukrainian.

Here's how she was described in a City Club email:

Kseniia and her family fled Ukraine at the onset of the war and undertook a long and challenging journey that brought them to Salem. Kseniia works as Ukrainian Navigator/Case Manager with Salem For Refugees organization now and helps other refugees to settle in and feel safe. Kseniia works hard to build a Ukrainian community in Salem and bring people and resources together.

Hnatovska shared some images of what her city, Kharkiv, was like before and after the unprovoked Russian invasion three years ago. I couldn't help but think of how Trump criticized Zelensky for being so angry at the Russian dictator, Vladimir Putin.

Gosh, Donald, maybe that had something to do with Putin being responsible for the deaths of so many Ukrainian, along with senseless attacks on civilians.

This is Hnatovska, her husband, and daughter in happier times back in Ukraine.


Her city looked beautiful.

Until Russian bombs started to fall. 

Parents would write a child's identifying information on their back in case the child became separated from their family. Or if the child was the sole survivor of a Russian attack.

Eventually Hnatovska and her family made it to Salem, where they were aided by the Salem for Refugees and other local people.

Tania Wilson Moran, the Volunteer Coordinator for Salem for Refugees, also spoke at the City Club program. She explained the rigorous process refugees have to go through before they are cleared for entry to the United States. Sometimes refugees have to wait over ten years to jump through all the hoops.

Irritatingly, Moran said that some Salem-bound refugees were ready to board planes to come to this country. Then the Trump administration cancelled all refugee admissions, an amazingly heartless and cruel thing to do.

The historic average of refugees allowed to come to the United States has been 65,000 to 70,000 per year. In 2023 the number was 60,000. Now the number is sitting at zero.

Moran said that in Salem, over 500 volunteers, 50 community partners, and 35 faith communities have welcomed over 1,000 refugees from 17 different countries who speak 29 different languages. That's wonderful. Hopefully the Trump administration will find a glimmer of compassion in its so-far cold heart and resume the entry of refugees to our country.

In response to a question from the audience about how the current dysfunction in Washington, D.C. has affected her organization, Moran said that Salem for Refugees is in a tough spot, having lost most of the group's federal funding. However, I recall her saying that they've been able to raise $100,000 from other sources.

Another audience member had a right-on comment about Ukraine losing the support of the American government. His hope was that Ukraine keeps the support of the American people. I feel the same way.