Bill Overview
Title: Depend on Domestic Clean Energy Act
Description: This bill addresses energy policy and climate resilience efforts of the Department of Defense (DOD), including by establishing in statute specified DOD clean energy targets, providing direct hire authority for DOD to appoint qualified candidates in positions that support the energy independence and climate resilience efforts, and authorizing DOD to develop charging or refueling stations for alternative fuel vehicles on its installations.
Sponsors: Rep. Casten, Sean [D-IL-6]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals impacted by DOD clean energy policies
Estimated Size: 12000000
- The Department of Defense (DOD) has a significant number of employees, including military personnel and civilian contractors, whose work may be impacted by changes in energy policy.
- There are approximately 1.3 million active-duty military personnel in the United States.
- Additionally, there are about 800,000 DOD civilian personnel who might be impacted.
- The broader goal of energy independence and climate resilience is intended to benefit all citizens by reducing emissions and dependence on foreign energy sources, but the bill specifically targets the DOD.
- The global impact extends to international military bases and operations by the DOD, which also involve interaction with host countries and international forces.
Reasoning
- The Department of Defense employs over 2 million Americans, comprising active-duty military and civilian personnel, making them directly influential by changes to its policies.
- The new policy targets clean energy and climate resilience, thus its impact will also indirectly ripple through communities near DOD installations by potentially increasing local jobs and reducing energy dependence.
- The policy's budget is significant but primarily directed towards infrastructural changes, direct hires, and energy station developments which will provide medium long-term benefits rather than immediate large-scale improvements in wellbeing.
- Wellbeing is expected to improve modestly among those directly impacted due to increased job opportunities and improved working conditions with clean energy integration.
- Broader effects on American society might be small unless energy independence initiatives create substantial economic ripples, such as reduced energy costs for citizens or improved air quality near military installations.
Simulated Interviews
Active-Duty Military (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think moving towards clean energy is a smart choice, although immediate changes might not be evident.
- It could improve our environmental mission readiness and reduce long-term costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Civilian Engineer at Naval Base (San Diego, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could streamline processes for projects and opens up more hiring options.
- Cleaner energy at bases is long overdue for environmental and operational benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
DOD Contractor (Huntsville, AL)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The new policy could bring more stability to contracts by introducing consistent clean energy projects.
- However, transition periods are typically challenging with reduced certainty initially.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Military Spouse (Miami, FL)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If the policy makes bases more self-sufficient, it could reduce deployment difficulties.
- There's potential for community improvements near bases, which is promising for families.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
DOD Civilian Energy Analyst (Seattle, WA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This initiative aligns with our sustainability goals and can lead to significant advancements.
- It could support more significant green projects which I've been advocating for years.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Local Business Owner (Honolulu, HI)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improvements in base facilities are good as they attract more personnel, which benefits my business.
- I hope the policy implementation attracts more long-term families and stable recruitment.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Base Facility Manager (Fort Worth, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This will bring much-needed improvements and reduce long-term operation costs.
- Sustainable facilities make the base more appealing for all staff and families.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Environmental Scientist (Denver, CO)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This step is crucial for reducing military environmental footprints.
- It's reassuring to see DOD leading on significant climate efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Grad Student (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could open up more career avenues in renewable energy within DOD.
- I'm optimistic about potential hirings and project opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Active-Duty Navy Personnel (Virginia Beach, VA)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Cleaner energy could change the logistics of our operations positively.
- Reducing emissions is key for maintaining our maritime environments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $600000000 (Low: $480000000, High: $720000000)
Year 3: $700000000 (Low: $560000000, High: $840000000)
Year 5: $950000000 (Low: $760000000, High: $1140000000)
Year 10: $1300000000 (Low: $1040000000, High: $1560000000)
Year 100: $1800000000 (Low: $1440000000, High: $2160000000)
Key Considerations
- The level of integration of clean energy technology will determine both the cost and potential savings.
- Technological advancements and their adoption rates will influence future cost estimates.
- Expected changes in global energy markets and their effect on DOD operations may present risks or opportunities.