Bill Overview
Title: American Energy Independence Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses U.S. energy independence, the production and importation of oil and natural gas, and the rescission of specified environmental requirements. Specifically, the bill directs the President to develop a plan for the United States to achieve energy independence by 2024. The Department of Energy (DOE) must also develop a program and issue rules to ensure that the United States achieves such energy independence and becomes a net exporter of energy. The bill also addresses energy pipelines, including by approving the TransCanada Keystone Pipeline in Phillips County, Montana for the import of oil from Canada to the United States. It also provides for energy production, including by requiring regulations to be issued by DOE to reduce requirements on entities harvesting energy through hydraulic fracturing, the Department of Transportation to promote stable and affordable gasoline and diesel prices, and the Department of the Interior to promote the leasing of federal land for oil and natural gas production. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must identify and repeal certain regulations that substantially reduce energy independence. Further, the bill prohibits the use of any funds to implement the Paris Agreement on climate change. Finally, the bill rescinds (1) Executive Order 14008 about tackling climate change, (2) the 2021 proposed rule issued by the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers about the scope of the Clean Water Act, and (3) the 2021 proposed rule issued by the EPA about methane gas emissions.
Sponsors: Rep. Jackson, Ronny [R-TX-13]
Target Audience
Population: People whose lives are impacted by shifts in U.S. energy policies
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The bill impacts the energy sector, which affects millions involved in petroleum, natural gas, renewables, and related industries across the globe.
- The global population relies on energy resources for daily life, meaning policy shifts toward U.S. energy independence could influence global oil prices and availability.
- Climate change policies, like the Paris Agreement, have extensive international participation, suggesting a global interest in U.S. policy.
- About 7.9 billion people in the world could indirectly feel effects from changes in U.S. energy policy, energy prices, and climate change efforts.
Reasoning
- U.S. energy policies can deeply impact individuals employed in and dependent on energy sectors (petroleum, natural gas, renewable energy).
- Residents near energy infrastructure like pipelines and drilling sites might experience environmental or economic impacts.
- Environmentalists and those concerned with climate change may see their well-being affected by policy changes that scale back regulations.
- Low-income and fixed-income populations might worry about increased fuel prices.
- Policies aiming at energy independence might not impact urban office workers as much, but could affect energy costs and climate-change-minded employees.
- This simulation covers various demographics, including young professionals, workers in fossil fuel industries, environmental advocates, and retirees.
Simulated Interviews
Oil Rig Manager (Houston, Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could mean more jobs and stability in my field.
- Less regulation is good for the industry but I worry about safety and environmental impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Environmental Scientist (Boulder, Colorado)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The rollback on environmental protections is concerning.
- I worry about the long-term effects of less environmental oversight.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 8 |
Retired Teacher (Fargo, North Dakota)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry that energy independence policies might raise prices.
- It's important to have stable costs for household budgeting.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 6 |
Software Developer (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think shifting to energy independence is logical, but not at the expense of our climate commitments.
- The policy could exclude renewable energy incentives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Transport Truck Driver (Cheyenne, Wyoming)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The push for energy independence could stabilize fuel prices.
- I support it if it controls diesel costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Renewable Energy Advisor (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned that traditional energy independence could overshadow renewables.
- The policy could limit growth in solar and wind sectors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 9 |
Student (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Removing climate policies is a step backward.
- It seems we're prioritizing short-term gains over long-term benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 8 |
Manufacturing Plant Manager (Charlotte, North Carolina)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Stable energy prices are critical for our manufacturing costs.
- Less energy regulation could improve business operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Financial Analyst (New York, New York)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy changes create both risks and opportunities for portfolios.
- I'm watching how changes affect fossil fuel and renewable sectors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Retired Auto Worker (Detroit, Michigan)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope energy independence lowers heating costs.
- Community resilience is linked to energy stability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $12000000000 (Low: $10000000000, High: $14000000000)
Year 2: $15000000000 (Low: $12000000000, High: $18000000000)
Year 3: $18000000000 (Low: $15000000000, High: $21000000000)
Year 5: $20000000000 (Low: $17000000000, High: $23000000000)
Year 10: $25000000000 (Low: $22000000000, High: $28000000000)
Year 100: $30000000000 (Low: $25000000000, High: $35000000000)
Key Considerations
- Potential environmental costs or damages if regulations are repealed excessively.
- Economic growth driven by increased energy output must balance with environmental sustainability.
- Potential geopolitical implications of shifting towards energy independence.
- Broad impacts on different economic sectors, including renewable energy.