Daily Score Blog

The Wall Street Journal's blog says it well:

By giving away greenhouse-gas emissions permits for free, Europe may hand power companies windfall profits of up to 71 billion euros—about $100 billion—and undermine the fight to curb emissions.

The money's coming from somewhere, of course. Unfortunately, that somewhere is ratepayers.

Utilities say that’s only natural, reflecting the “opportunity cost” they incur in not being able to sell their permits into the market. Critics, including some European investigators, allege the utilities are grabbing “windfall profits.”

In Germany, for example, where coal makes up 70% of generation, and utilities pass on prices to consumers while lobbying for free permits, the windfall over the next four years could be between 15 billion euros and 34 billion euros.

UPDATE: I didn't choose the best title for this post. A source in Oregon tells me:

Just wanted to let you know that it won't be "Measure 21", however. It won't get a measure number until it qualifies for the ballot. It is, at this point, just Initiative Petition 21, but that's not a number the public typically ever sees. Eventually, it will likely be Measure 50-something. Anyway, that just seemed like the kind of not-so-exciting technicality you'd want to be on top of.

Doh!

***

Surprise! Oregon has a new property rights ballot measure!

No, it's not Groundhog Day. It's just politics-as-usual in one of my favorite states. This year, it'll be Measure 21.

It's a bad idea, but it's fairly small potatoes compared to the big "pay-or-waive" initiatives that toured the West recently -- and which mostly went down in flames. Basically, Measure 21 would make building permits unnecessary, as long as the value of the improvement is less than $35,000 (with that figure adjusted for inflation in the future).

On my reading, the measure doesn't appear to invalidate building codes or zoning regulations. It does, however, raise an interesting procedural question. Because building permits are often the primary enforcement mechanism for maintaining standards, making permits unnecessary seems like a sneak attack on the law. In fact, Measure 21 appears to be another instance of a bad neighbor law: one that puts communities on the defensive against individuals who might like to elide the rules.

Four tribes broke rank with conservationists yesterday and cut a deal with the federal government to end their longstanding opposition to dams on the Snake and Columbia rivers. In return, the Yakama, Colville, Umatilla and Warm Springs tribes will receive $900 million for restoring salmon habitat. The tribes see this as a solution to the enduring legal wars over salmon. "It's moving our energy from courtrooms to streambeds," John Ogan, attorney for the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, told the Portland Oregonian.

Conservationists, on the other hand, are devastated at losing their key allies. But they’re not changing course. “(W)hat does the Endangered Species Act say needs to be done?” Todd True, a lawyer for Earthjustice, said in the New York Times. “And what does the science say needs to be done?” 

The Oregonian has the definitive report, although the story is covered in most of the big regional media outlets. The Boise Idaho Statesman, meanwhile, focuses on the Nez Perce’s position. They are the only tribe out of the five involved in the lawsuits to reject the deal.

In other news, see a great op-ed in the Juneau Empire by a 100-year-old Tlingit elder who was born the same year Alaska’s Tongass National Forest was established. He compares the history of the Tongass (the traditional territory of the Tlingit) to his own journey through life – and the struggles of his people for equal rights. 

(The accompanying photo was taken at a Portland demonstration to remove dams from the Klamath River, which flows through Southern Oregon and Northern California. Thanks to Patrick McCully, via flickr.)

Apropos of last week's post on the sudden surge in food stamp enrollment in Washington state, WWU professor and blogger Scott Miles has an interesting take. 

To recap:  an article in The New York Times had suggested that Washington's worst-in-nation, 25% increase in food stamp enrollment last year was largely the result of severe December flooding. 

But Scott's combed through the numbers a bit, and has concluded that there simply aren't enough people in the flood-ravaged counties to account for the surge in food stamp participation.

My estimate is that the disaster represents 20 to 40% of the increase. So even without out the December 2007 floods, the State of Washington still had the greatest increase in FSP enrollment in the country between 2006 and 2007.

I haven't vetted Scott's numbers, and there may well be more to this story; in fact, there's already been a bit of back-and-forth on Scott's blog about his figures, since enrollment standards were apparently loosened in more-populous King and Snohomish counties, too.

Regardless about how the final numbers turn out, though, it's important to remember that there's been plenty of economic hardship in the state, even without the foul weather.