Bill Overview
Title: No Energy Revenues for Russian Hostilities Act of 2022
Description: This bill prohibits, with some exceptions, the Department of the Treasury from authorizing certain energy-related transactions that would otherwise be blocked by an executive order barring transactions related to specified harmful foreign activities of the Russian government. The bill also revokes a license issued February 28, 2022, by the Office of Foreign Assets Control within Treasury that authorized certain transactions barred by the executive order. The bill allows a waiver from the limitation on an energy transaction if the transaction involves funds owed to a Russian person and the funds are to be used for the sale of agricultural commodities, food, medicine, or medical devices. The bill terminates on the earlier of five years after its enactment, or 30 days after the President reports to Congress that Russia has ceased activities destabilizing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.
Sponsors: Rep. Barr, Andy [R-KY-6]
Target Audience
Population: People in countries dependent on Russian energy exports and the Russian population.
Estimated Size: 10000000
- The bill targets energy-related transactions linked to the Russian government, which implies that the immediate impact is on the Russian economy, specifically its energy sector.
- Depending on the extent of the blockades, global energy prices might be affected, potentially impacting countries that rely on Russian energy exports.
- The bill includes exceptions for transactions involving agricultural and medical products, which might reduce the extent of the impact on humanitarian grounds within Russia.
- Countries closely involved in trading with Russia for energy will be looking for alternative sources, impacting their economies and energy strategies.
- The waiver provisions suggest that the bill also considers possible humanitarian impacts on Russian civilians if those provisions were not in place.
- The revocation of specific licenses means companies previously doing business under those authorizations will be affected, needing to shift their operational strategies.
Reasoning
- The policy's immediate impacts will be on companies engaged in energy transactions with Russia. These businesses will need to re-evaluate their operations and possibly seek alternative markets or suppliers.
- Individuals and families in the US might experience indirect effects through potential changes in energy prices, which could be influenced by shifts in global energy supply chains.
- People living in states with significant energy industry presence might be more closely impacted due to industry adjustments as companies comply with the new restrictions.
- Wellbeing will be self-reported and subject to personal circumstances, such as whether individuals are directly employed in affected industries and their general socio-economic status.
- A range of opinions and wellbeing changes should be collected, including those completely unaffected to those with high impact due to their employment in specific sectors.
Simulated Interviews
Oil Industry Executive (Houston, Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe the policy will have a significant impact on our operations. We will need to find alternative markets or renegotiate existing contracts, which could lead to layoffs or restructuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Energy Market Analyst (New York, New York)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy adds complexity to the energy markets. We might see volatility, but it's also an opportunity for shifts in investment focus.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Retired Teacher (Miami, Florida)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't understand all the details, but I hope this doesn't cause my energy bills to go up. I'm on a fixed income and any increase would be challenging.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Tech Entrepreneur (San Francisco, California)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could boost interest in energy innovations domestically, creating a market for alternative solutions. It's an exciting time for clean energy movements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Automotive Engineer (Detroit, Michigan)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might steer more research and development funding towards hybrid and electric vehicles, which could stimulate job growth in our sector.
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 | 8 | 7 |
Energy Policy Researcher (Dallas, Texas)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Such policies are necessary for geopolitical stability, but they require careful monitoring to avoid significant economic disruptions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Small Business Owner (Portland, Oregon)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might increase demand for renewable energy alternatives, which could benefit my business.
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 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Environmentalist (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reducing reliance on fossil fuels is crucial. I support this policy if it leads to more sustainable practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
University Professor (Boston, Massachusetts)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's important for the U.S. to take a stand against aggression, though we need to be ready for the economic ripples in the global markets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Freelance Writer (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm curious to see how this affects energy prices and if it pushes for accelerated clean energy adoption. It is likely to have some economic trade-offs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $31000000, High: $72000000)
Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $32000000, High: $74000000)
Year 5: $58000000 (Low: $34000000, High: $78000000)
Year 10: $60000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $80000000)
Year 100: $64000000 (Low: $36000000, High: $84000000)
Key Considerations
- The geopolitical ramifications of cutting financial ties to Russian energy sectors could have broader implications on US foreign policy and economic alliances.
- Implementation and monitoring of sanctions need robust and continuous oversight to prevent violations.
- The exemption policies included for agricultural and medical transactions require careful management to avoid abuse and ensure compliance.