Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7285

Bill Overview

Title: Unleashing American Energy Act

Description: This bill requires a minimum amount of oil and gas lease sales a year on certain submerged lands of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) and limits delays on federal oil and gas leases on such lands. Specifically, this bill requires the Department of the Interior to annually conduct a minimum of two region-wide oil and gas lease sales in each of the following regions of the OCS: (1) the Gulf of Mexico region in the Central Gulf of Mexico Planning Area and the Western Gulf of Mexico Planning Area, and (2) the Alaska region. In addition, the bill requires the President to obtain congressional approval before delaying federal oil and gas leases on the OCS.

Sponsors: Rep. Carl, Jerry L. [R-AL-1]

Target Audience

Population: People affected by increased oil and gas activities on the OCS

Estimated Size: 11000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Oil Rig Engineer (Houston, Texas)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could stabilize job availability, which is good for my family.
  • However, the environmental risks worry me long-term.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Environmental Scientist (Anchorage, Alaska)

Age: 31 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased drilling poses risks to wildlife and climate; it's very concerning.
  • Economic benefits are less clear to me but pressing.

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 3 5
Year 20 2 5

Fishing Business Owner (Lafayette, Louisiana)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm worried about what it means for fishing businesses.
  • Positive economic impacts would need to outweigh environmental risks.

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 5
Year 20 4 5

Real Estate Agent (Gulfport, Mississippi)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • There could be a short-term boost to the housing market.
  • Long-term, environmental issues could deter buyers.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Indigenous Rights Activist (Kenai, Alaska)

Age: 29 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Cultural sites could be at risk; this policy challenges our land rights.
  • I am deeply concerned about environmental degradation.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 3 4
Year 2 3 4
Year 3 2 4
Year 5 2 4
Year 10 2 4
Year 20 2 4

Logistics Manager (Baton Rouge, Louisiana)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased activity could make my sector busier, boosting income.
  • I worry about regional stability with environmental risks.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

State Government Official (Juneau, Alaska)

Age: 46 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might improve state revenue but needs balanced environmental considerations.
  • Public opinion is divided; critical to manage expectations carefully.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

College Student (Pascagoula, Mississippi)

Age: 23 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The negative environmental impacts concern me deeply.
  • Although economic benefits are touted, I worry for future generations.

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 3 5
Year 20 3 5

Local Politician (Mobile, Alabama)

Age: 58 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Support for the policy is vibrant among many constituents, but so are environmental concerns.
  • Finding compromise is essential for future development.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Oil and Gas Equipment Technician (Beaumont, Texas)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 17/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • More leases could mean more work and job security for me.
  • Environmental rules need to be part of the conversation too.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $70000000)

Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $70000000)

Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $70000000)

Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $70000000)

Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $70000000)

Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $70000000)

Key Considerations