Bill Overview
Title: Restore Onshore Energy Production 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 and specifies a minimum number of sales that Interior must conduct in each state where there is land available for oil and gas leasing. The bill also prohibits the President from taking actions to cancel, delay, or otherwise impede federal processes related to energy mineral leasing without congressional approval.
Sponsors: Rep. Rosendale Sr., Matthew M. [R-MT-At Large]
Target Audience
Population: People involved or affected by onshore oil and gas leasing activities
Estimated Size: 20000000
- The bill directly affects individuals and communities involved in or nearby onshore oil and gas operations, including both workers in these sectors and those living in close proximity to onshore drilling sites.
- It impacts local economies that are reliant on energy production for jobs and revenue, including not just oil and gas workers, but also those in industries that support these operations, such as equipment manufacturing and maintenance, logistics, and hospitality.
- It impacts the energy market, potentially influencing energy prices, which affects consumers in general.
- Environmental impacts from increased oil and gas production can affect populations concerned with environmental conservation and air and water quality.
- Globally, it could influence energy markets beyond the US, possibly affecting international supply, demand, and prices of oil and gas.
Reasoning
- The policy largely impacts individuals and communities living in areas where onshore oil and gas drilling is prevalent. This includes both the workers directly employed in the energy sector and those in auxiliary industries that support these operations. Thus, a significant section of the population in states with abundant oil and gas reserves will see economic impacts, potentially improving their well-being through increased employment and economic activity.
- On the downside, there are potential environmental impacts that can affect those living near drilling sites or who are concerned about environmental conservation. Communities may experience changes in air and water quality, which could adversely affect health and well-being in the long term.
- The policy may have broader economic impacts by affecting national energy prices. Reduced energy costs could improve general consumer well-being, although these effects might be offset by the potential environmental costs.
- The budget restrictions imply a limit on how many lease sales and related activities can occur simultaneously, which may moderate the policy's immediate impact on job creation and economic activity.
Simulated Interviews
Oil Rig Supervisor (Midland, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a lifeline for us oil workers, especially in tough economic times. It ensures continued employment and stability for my family.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Logistics Coordinator (Bismarck, ND)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy will boost economic activity in our region. More job opportunities mean more work for logistics and transportation as well.
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 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Environmental Scientist (Louisville, KY)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am concerned about potential increases in pollution and environmental degradation. We need policies that consider long-term environmental impacts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 5 |
Software Engineer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I understand the economic benefits, I am worried about the environmental costs. There has to be a balance.
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 |
Retired Oil Worker (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy brings back memories of stable and prosperous times when oil was booming. It's a good thing for the younger generation.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Local Business Owner (Cheyenne, WY)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased oil activity will bring more customers and help local businesses like mine thrive.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
School Teacher (Denver, CO)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My concern is for the students and community health. Drilling has to be balanced with public health initiatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 5 |
Environmental Consultant (Casper, WY)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Consulting work may increase due to higher regulatory compliance needs, but environmental health remains a priority.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Finance Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might offer short-term economic gains, but what about sustainable energy investments?
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 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Coal Miner (Charleston, WV)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy won't change much for coal mining, but a robust energy market benefits everyone. Though, environmental costs worry me.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2000000000)
Year 2: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2000000000)
Year 3: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2000000000)
Year 5: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2000000000)
Year 10: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2000000000)
Year 100: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2000000000)
Key Considerations
- Environmental impacts and resistance from conservation groups may cause legal challenges, possibly delaying implementation.
- Market conditions and energy prices will strongly influence the actual income from lease sales and production.
- Political and policy shifts could affect the stability and predictability of lease sale revenues.
- Involvement of state governments and local stakeholders is crucial as they are directly affected by energy extraction activities.