Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6680

Bill Overview

Title: Blue Energy Innovation Act of 2022

Description: This bill requires the Department of Energy to establish and implement the Integrated Blue Economy and Blue Energy Technologies Program to provide funding for research and development of blue energy technologies for specified purposes (e.g., developing new blue energy market opportunities). Blue energy technologies are technologies that (1) derive or generate energy from a renewable energy resource or capture, remove, and sequester greenhouse gases; and (2) are located in an aquatic environment.

Sponsors: Rep. Kilmer, Derek [D-WA-6]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals in coastal communities and stakeholders in the blue energy sector worldwide

Estimated Size: 30000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Marine Biologist (San Diego, CA)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could boost research opportunities and funding for projects I've wanted to explore.
  • Increasing interest in blue energy innovations may lead to better career prospects.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 10 6

Energy Sector Executive (Houston, TX)

Age: 46 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is a great step towards diversifying our energy portfolio.
  • Investment in blue energy can open new revenue streams.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 5

Environmental Scientist (Miami, FL)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope the funding helps us understand and mitigate impacts on local ecosystems.
  • We need to ensure sustainable practices as we develop these technologies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Software Developer (Seattle, WA)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's interesting, but I don't see a direct connection to my work.
  • I hope it leads to broader environmental benefits in the aquatic ecosystem.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 5 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Local Govt. Official (New Orleans, LA)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Our community could benefit from new jobs and energy solutions.
  • I'm hopeful that this policy sparks local interest and investment.

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 9 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 8 6

Retired Fisherman (Cape Cod, MA)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I worry about how this might affect the fishing industry.
  • If done right, it could help maintain our waters' health.

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 7 6
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Graduate Student (Portland, OR)

Age: 27 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy aligns with what I'm learning and inspires my thesis work.
  • I'm keen to see how these technologies evolve over the next few years.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 9 6

Renewable Energy Consultant (Anchorage, AK)

Age: 44 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 12.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The initiative could enhance opportunities in Alaska's coastal regions.
  • We have untapped resources that could be valuable for blue energy.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 4

Small Business Owner (Charleston, SC)

Age: 31 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • With this policy, my business could diversify into blue energy services.
  • I see potential market growth that aligns with this act.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 5

Environmental Advocate (Boston, MA)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The Blue Energy Innovation Act aligns well with our goals for sustainable energy development.
  • I hope this policy pushes forward more community-focused initiatives.

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 8 7
Year 20 7 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $300000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $400000000)

Year 2: $300000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $400000000)

Year 3: $300000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $400000000)

Year 5: $250000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $350000000)

Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)

Key Considerations