Bill Overview
Title: Regional Innovation Act of 2021
Description: This bill establishes a Regional Technology and Innovation Hub Program and a Regional Clean Energy Innovation Program. The bill directs the Department of Commerce to establish the Regional Technology and Innovation Hub Program to encourage collaboration among local, state, and federal government entities, institutions of higher education, the private sector, nonprofit organizations, and others to promote inclusive regional innovation initiatives; designate eligible consortia as hubs and facilitate activities by such consortia in implementing their regional innovation strategies; and develop best practices for regional development and competitiveness in technology and innovation. Additionally, the Department of Energy shall establish the Regional Clean Energy Innovation Program to enhance the economic, environmental, and energy security of the United States; accelerate the pace of innovation of clean energy technologies through regional clean energy innovation partnerships; improve the competitiveness of U.S. clean energy technology research, development, demonstration, and commercial application; and support the development of tools and technologies best suited for use in diverse regions of the United States, including in rural, tribal, and low-income communities. Commerce shall carry out a program of data collection and analysis of technology and innovation sectors critical to realizing national objectives, including national security, economic prosperity, and social welfare.
Sponsors: Rep. Wild, Susan [D-PA-7]
Target Audience
Population: People affected by regional technology and clean energy initiatives
Estimated Size: 30000000
- The Regional Innovation Act of 2021 aims to establish programs that would impact regional technology and clean energy initiatives, focusing on collaboration among various levels of government, educational institutions, nonprofits, and the private sector.
- The initiatives aim to promote technology and clean energy innovation at the regional level, suggesting that populations living in designated innovation hubs will be directly impacted.
- The bill specifically addresses improvements in economic, environmental, and energy security, as well as competitiveness in clean energy technology, suggesting impacts on individuals working within these sectors.
- The focus also includes rural, tribal, and low-income communities, indicating a diverse and broad impact across different community types.
- Stakeholders involved in technology, innovation, and clean energy fields, including those in policy and regulatory roles, will form part of the impacted population both directly and indirectly.
Reasoning
- The policy is aimed primarily at innovation hubs, which will likely be in urban and metropolitan areas, but also extends to rural, tribal, and low-income communities.
- The budget suggests that large urban areas and regions with existing infrastructure for innovation and clean energy are prioritized. However, there is intentional outreach to marginalized and underrepresented areas.
- The expected diversity in impact arises from direct support for development and technology sectors and indirect effects on communities through job creation and infrastructure.
- I considered a mix of ages, occupations, and socio-economic backgrounds to reflect the diversity of the policy's target impact, including unaffected individuals for balance. This helps in understanding the broad impact and bottlenecks potential beneficiaries may face.
- The Cantril scale provides a measure of subjective well-being, capturing how people anticipate the policy will alter their life satisfaction over time.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy could significantly drive innovation in the tech industry, especially around renewable energy.
- Our company may benefit from increased investment and collaboration opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Factory Worker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful this policy will enable new job opportunities in clean energy, but I worry about job security during transition periods.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Farmer (Rural Kansas)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this policy brings renewable energy to areas like mine, we could reduce operational costs significantly.
- I'm skeptical about how much attention rural communities will truly get.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Policy Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy opens many avenues for public-private partnerships crucial for advancing clean energy policy.
- I'm concerned about the implementation and ensuring that funds reach the intended areas effectively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retired Educator (Salt Lake City, UT)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support any policy that pushes for technology and clean energy solutions, but these initiatives often bypass older populations.
- I hope some benefits trickle down to local community initiatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
University Student (Albuquerque, NM)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like this one could increase internship and job opportunities post-graduation.
- I'm excited about the potential for practical training programs linked to these hubs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Community Leader (Tribal Lands, AZ)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I welcome initiatives that bring resources for clean energy to our tribal lands.
- However, we need assurances that tribal sovereignty and needs are respected and prioritized.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Energy Sector Manager (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy supports my work in advancing sustainable energy solutions.
- It's critical we stay ahead in the energy sector as global competitors accelerate their clean energy developments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Nonprofit Worker (Portland, OR)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While the programs target clean energy, I worry that smaller nonprofits may not see direct benefits.
- Collaboration is key, and I hope the funding structures enable grassroots innovation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Environmental Scientist (Miami, FL)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The Regional Innovation Act can accelerate environmental projects I'm passionate about.
- However, there needs to be a clear plan on how these hubs will be developed and measured.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)
Year 2: $350000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $400000000)
Year 3: $400000000 (Low: $350000000, High: $450000000)
Year 5: $450000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $500000000)
Year 10: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)
Year 100: $600000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $700000000)
Key Considerations
- The scale and structure of the regional programs and their alignment with existing state and local initiatives could significantly affect implementation costs.
- The bill's success depends on effectively balancing governmental, academic, and industrial partnerships.
- While regional in focus, the policy has national implications, especially in aligning local innovations with national security and sustainability goals.
- Global competitiveness of U.S. industries is central to the bill's success, emphasizing the importance of leveraging international best practices.