Huh?

It's up to Oregon to deal with global warming
It hurts to think of Oregon's Mid-Valley without pinot noir and vineyards; of a coast where visitors crowd onto a few ragged beaches; of Cascades so dry that ski areas depend on snow machines all winter.

How would Salem's water supply be affected if this watershed became as parched as the Klamath Basin was a few years ago? How would the state cover firefighting costs if every year were a disastrous year for wildfires? How would county health authorities cope if new diseases moved north as temperatures warmed?
Run for your lives!!! The sky is falling, the sky is falling!

As the economists point out, opportunities exist for those who tap the growing market for products to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.
"The economists" are not named specifically as if all economists agree on this one overriding principle. Would a state of "The ecomonomists agree that high taxes are bad for economic growth" ever make it past a Fishwrapper editor?

When entrepreneurs find ways to cut people's commute or trim their electricity bill or fuel bill, people will invest in them. Such alternatives could help offset the shock that global warming could deal Oregon's economy.
Absolutely. That's a free market principle and with the exception of the last sentence I agree. (I don't concede that global warming is manmande.)

Incredible as it seems, the auto industry and some Republicans have been trying to put the brakes on Gov. Ted Kulongoski's initiative to tighten auto-emission standards for cars and trucks. They've filed a lawsuit to keep Oregon from adopting California's stricter standards instead of the feds' ho-hum ones.
But instead of "entrepreneurs" and the market dictating the best solution, the Fishwrapper wants government to make a decree and the loyal subjects to simply bend over and take it. No thanks.