Bill Overview
Title: American Energy Security and Transparency Act
Description: This bill requires the Department of the Interior to immediately resume sales of oil and gas leases in accordance with applicable onshore mineral leasing laws. The bill further specifies that Interior must conduct a minimum number of sales and offer all parcels eligible for oil and gas development in each state where there is land available for oil and gas leasing. Additionally, Interior must report to Congress, and publish certain information on its website, concerning sales of oil and gas leases and related drilling permits.
Sponsors: Rep. Herrell, Yvette [R-NM-2]
Target Audience
Population: People whose wellbeing is impacted by oil and gas policy changes
Estimated Size: 50000000
- The bill resumes and mandates sales of oil and gas leases, which will directly impact those working in the oil and gas industry, including workers, managers, and companies involved in these sectors.
- Environmental groups and communities advocating for sustainable and renewable energy sources may be impacted, as they might view increased fossil fuel development as contrary to their goals.
- Communities living near potential or existing oil and gas drilling sites may be affected by changes in local land use, potential environmental risks, and economic opportunities.
- Consumers across the country might experience changes in energy prices depending on how the increased oil and gas production affects domestic energy supply and market prices.
- The policy could also affect regional employment rates and economic activities in areas where new leases are offered.
- Increased leasing could have environmental impacts that may affect broader global efforts to address climate change.
Reasoning
- The target population is broad as it includes not only workers in the oil and gas industry but also environmental groups, local communities, and general consumers who may be affected either economically or environmentally by this policy.
- The policy budget is limited. Given the American estimate of 50,000,000 people potentially impacted, the budget's immediate financial effects per person are limited, suggesting the policy might focus on regulatory changes instead of direct financial benefits.
- Wellbeing impacts are likely to be mixed, with potential positive impacts for those benefiting from job opportunities and potentially negative impacts for those concerned about environmental risks.
Simulated Interviews
Oil Rig Manager (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm glad to see more support for our industry. This could mean more job security and potentially more projects coming our way.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Environmental Scientist (Austin, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is concerning because it could reverse some of the progress we're making towards cleaner energy and impact climate change negatively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 5 |
Landowner (Denver, CO)
Age: 34 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about the potential devaluation of my property and environmental issues, but there might also be economic benefits.
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 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (Bismarck, ND)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is great for business. More drilling means more customers and revenue for my company.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retired (Santa Fe, NM)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry this might disrupt the natural beauty and peace of the area and posibly impact our community's health.
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 |
Renewable Energy Advocate (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a step backward in combating climate change and supporting renewable energy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 4 |
Gas Station Attendant (Oklahoma City, OK)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Guess it could mean cheaper prices at some point, which would be nice.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Energy Analyst (Pittsburgh, PA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could lead to short-term energy price stability, but it doesn't align with longer-term sustainability goals.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired Oil Industry Executive (Cheyenne, WY)
Age: 67 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's good to see the industry gaining support again, supporting economic growth and energy needs.
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 | 8 | 7 |
Software Developer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Feels like a step away from renewable energy investment, which could impact innovation in cleaner tech.
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 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $65000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $65000000)
Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $65000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $65000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $65000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $65000000)
Key Considerations
- Environmental impacts due to increased fossil fuel development and potential conflicts with climate change goals.
- Potential legal challenges from environmental groups could alter timelines and costs.
- Market conditions affecting oil and gas demand and prices could significantly impact financial projections.