Bill Overview
Title: Strategy to Secure Offshore Energy Act
Description: This bill modifies requirements for the National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program, including by specifying that the program must be updated on a five-year basis and setting a minimum number of annual lease sales for the program.
Sponsors: Rep. Van Duyne, Beth [R-TX-24]
Target Audience
Population: Consumers and populations globally reliant on oil and gas
Estimated Size: 100000000
- The bill specifies requirements for oil and gas leasing on the Outer Continental Shelf, which is the land submerged under the ocean out to the edge of the continental margin.
- Such legislation typically impacts industries like oil and gas exploration and extraction, which are significant employers with a large workforce and economic influence.
- Changes to leasing requirements could influence energy prices, affecting consumers globally who rely on oil and gas products.
- Environmental groups and communities concerned about offshore drilling's ecological effects would be directly impacted as changes in policy could affect marine and coastal ecosystems.
- Local economies that are heavily dependent on oil and gas activities can be directly affected by changes in leasing practices.
Reasoning
- The policy is likely to primarily impact individuals associated with the oil and gas industry, including workers in those sectors and individuals in regions where offshore drilling is a significant economic factor, such as the Gulf Coast.
- The policy may indirectly affect consumers more broadly through changes in energy prices, which can impact cost of living and economic stability.
- Because the policy involves federal leasing program updates and does not directly provide financial assistance or subsidies, the impact on general consumers could be moderate unless energy prices are significantly affected.
- Environmentalists and eco-conscious individuals may perceive negative impacts due to potential environmental risks associated with increased offshore drilling.
- Coastal states that rely heavily on tourism and fishing might see both potential positive impacts from economic activity and negative impacts from environmental concerns.
Simulated Interviews
Offshore Drilling Technician (Houston, Texas)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is likely to secure more jobs for individuals like me and ensure job security over the next few years.
- New offshore leases will mean more projects and potentially higher wages.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Environmental Scientist (Baton Rouge, Louisiana)
Age: 43 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about the potential negative environmental impact this policy may have on marine life and coastal environments.
- Increased drilling could lead to more spills and ecological harm, which is devastating for local wildlife.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 7 |
Software Developer (San Francisco, California)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't feel this policy will directly impact my life immediately, but I worry about the long-term environmental risks it imposes.
- It reinforces dependence on fossil fuels at a time when we should be focusing on renewable energy.
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 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
Local Business Owner (Tourism) (New Orleans, Louisiana)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More offshore drilling could potentially hurt my business if it leads to oil spills or deters tourists.
- However, increased economic activity could also bring more visitors to the area.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 8 |
Retired Marine Engineer (Biloxi, Mississippi)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could provide future job security for young engineers entering the field.
- I'm concerned about the balance needed between jobs and environmental protection.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
High School Science Teacher (Miami, Florida)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy doesn't affect me personally, but I'm worried about its impact on marine education and conservation efforts.
- More drilling could hurt the natural resources our students learn about and enjoy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 7 |
Energy Policy Consultant (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 44 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- From a policy standpoint, this bill could shift the investment focus back to fossil fuels, which contradicts our climate goals.
- There may be a short-term job boost, but we risk long-term sustainability.
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 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
University Student (Anchorage, Alaska)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried that more drilling could harm delicate Arctic environments and endanger wildlife.
- Policy like this doesn't align with what I envision for the future of energy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 8 |
Public Health Researcher (Boston, Massachusetts)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased offshore drilling could potentially lead to greater pollution, which directly impacts public health.
- I'm concerned about the broader implications for air and water quality.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 8 |
Energy Market Analyst (New York, New York)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could stabilize energy prices in the short term by increasing supply, which is beneficial economically.
- However, there's a risk of over-reliance on non-renewable sources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 2: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 3: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 5: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 10: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 100: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Key Considerations
- Environmental advocacy groups may oppose the increased leasing due to potential ecological impacts.
- Local economies relying on offshore drilling could see growth, potentially increasing regional economic activity.
- Global oil supply dynamics could be affected depending on the scale of increased U.S. production.
- The balance between economic growth from energy production and conservation goals will be a critical discussion point.