Bill Overview
Title: American Gas for Allies Act
Description: This bill deems the exportation of liquefied natural gas (LNG) for allied countries to be consistent with the public interest for purposes of the National Gas Act during the next three years. Thus, the bill allows such exports to be expedited during that time period. In order to be expedited, the LNG export must be for (1) a member country of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or (2) any other foreign country if the Department of State determines that the export of LNG to that country would promote the national security interests of the United States.
Sponsors: Rep. Fletcher, Lizzie [D-TX-7]
Target Audience
Population: People living in countries importing LNG under the American Gas for Allies Act
Estimated Size: 1000000
- The bill affects countries that are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which has 31 member countries.
- The bill also affects other countries to which the U.S. Department of State determines LNG export would promote U.S. national security interests.
- LNG consumers in those allied countries will be impacted as they may receive U.S. LNG imports.
- Global energy markets will be affected by changes in LNG supply from the U.S.
- The LNG industry in the U.S. will be impacted due to potential changes in export volumes.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily targets the U.S. LNG producers and exporters, along with the associated workforce. Given that this workforce is estimated to be around 1 million people, it makes sense to include a mix of individuals who may directly work in the LNG export industry, those indirectly affected through employment in related sectors, and average citizens who might experience broader economic impacts.
- The policy's fiscal constraints indicate that while the overall budget is substantial, the direct impacts are likely to be concentrated among those closely tied to the LNG industry. Thus, significant impacts will primarily be on workers and businesses directly involved in LNG production and export. Indirect impacts might be observed in related industries or through economic changes like energy prices.
- Additionally, considering a portion of the population potentially experiencing no impact ensures a realistic, rounded understanding of the policy's reach, acknowledging that the broad 1 million person impact estimate might involve varying degrees of influence or intangible benefits like national security.
Simulated Interviews
LNG plant manager (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is great for the industry as it could lead to increased demand and potentially more jobs.
- There might be environmental concerns, but the economic benefits are significant.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Environmental scientist (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could exacerbate climate change by increasing fossil fuel use globally.
- However, it could also be seen as strengthening U.S. geopolitical ties.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Oil and gas laborer (Dallas, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We might see more stability in jobs and pay with new contracts coming in.
- There are concerns about environmental regulations being overlooked.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Tech startup entrepreneur (Denver, CO)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy detracts from investments in renewable energy, which we really need.
- It could offer short-term economic boosts to specific sectors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 8 |
Steelworker (Pittsburgh, PA)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If gas prices rise, it could impact steel production costs.
- Domestic prices should stay affordable to protect industries like ours.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Retiree (Miami, FL)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think this policy impacts me directly, but rising energy prices could affect my budgeting.
- Energy costs always play a role in the economy - sometimes more, sometimes less.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Graduate student (Seattle, WA)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy aligns with strong foreign policies and energy security efforts.
- However, it raises questions about sustainability and long-term impacts.
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 |
LNG terminal operator (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More shipments mean more work, which could lead to extra hours and job security.
- There are potential safety risks with increased operations, though.
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 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Policy analyst (Hartford, CT)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is more of a geopolitical tool than an environmental policy.
- There are economic benefits, but these should be weighed against environmental costs.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Logistics manager (Chicago, IL)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could increase our workload, providing more job opportunities for our drivers and staff.
- Increased activity suggests potential growth for us in the logistics sector.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)
Year 2: $120000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $180000000)
Year 3: $140000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $210000000)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The bill's implications on diplomatic relations with non-allied countries.
- Impact of increased U.S. LNG exports on global gas markets and prices.
- Potential environmental effects from increased natural gas production and transportation.
- Readiness of U.S. LNG infrastructure to accommodate expedited export demands.