Bill Overview
Title: Vehicle Innovation Act of 2022
Description: 22 This bill authorizes through FY2027 the Department of Energy (DOE) to research, develop, and commercialize innovative vehicle technologies. Among other things, the bill requires DOE to conduct a program on materials, technologies, and processes with the potential to substantially reduce or eliminate petroleum use and the emissions of U.S. passenger and commercial vehicles, including in the areas of natural gas and hydrogen vehicle technologies, electrification of vehicle systems, and hydraulic hybrid technologies; implement a program of advanced vehicle manufacturing technologies and practices, including innovative processes to increase the production rate and decrease the cost of advanced battery and fuel cell manufacturing; and seek opportunities to leverage resources and support initiatives of state and local governments in developing and promoting advanced vehicle technologies, manufacturing, and infrastructure.
Sponsors: Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-12]
Target Audience
Population: Global population impacted by vehicle innovation and environmental changes
Estimated Size: 335000000
- The bill focuses on research and development of vehicle technologies aimed at reducing emissions and petroleum use, which has implications for a broad range of stakeholders, including vehicle manufacturers, suppliers, and consumers globally.
- People involved in the automotive industry, including engineers, researchers, and workers in battery and fuel cell manufacturing, will be directly influenced by the changes and investments in advanced technologies.
- Consumers globally will potentially benefit from advancements due to the availability of cleaner, more efficient vehicles.
- The bill also mentions leveraging resources with state and local governments, suggesting that citizens in various countries might experience accelerated adoption or support for advanced vehicle technologies.
Reasoning
- The Vehicle Innovation Act is expected to influence a wide range of people, particularly those involved in the automotive industry, either directly or indirectly. This includes engineers, manufacturers, suppliers, and consumers, as well as researchers and government employees working on related initiatives.
- Considering the policy's focus on reducing emissions and dependency on petroleum, the primary impact will be on stakeholders involved in the automotive supply chain and related industries, such as battery and fuel cell manufacturing.
- The policy might not have a direct impact on certain population groups who are not involved with or actively using advanced vehicle technologies, but broader environmental benefits might still reach them.
- Given budget constraints and the focus of the policy, the implementation will likely prioritize high-impact technological advancements and areas capable of significant progress within the next decade.
Simulated Interviews
Automotive Engineer (Detroit, MI)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy could drive significant innovations in our industry. It provides the necessary push to focus on cleaner technologies, which aligns with where global automotive trends are heading.
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 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Tech Start-up Specialist (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy recognizes the potential of hydrogen technology, which could catalyze investment and collaboration opportunities. It's critical for scaling our efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Oil and Gas Industry Executive (Houston, TX)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I recognize the importance of moving to sustainable energy, the policy could significantly disrupt the oil and gas sectors. We need a transition period.
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 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Environmental Policy Advisor (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy paves the way for transformational environmental benefits. It aligns with our climate goals and will enhance our air quality in urban areas.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 7 |
Economic Analyst (New York City, NY)
Age: 63 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The economic implications of this policy are immense, with potential job growth in clean industries but challenges in transitioning traditional sectors. It's a mixed bag.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Battery Production Worker (Austin, TX)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this leads to more stable jobs and career growth in my field. Better technologies will likely require an increase in production and offer more opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Farmer (Rural Kansas)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Not sure how this directly impacts me, but any reduction in petroleum-based systems could eventually influence farming equipment technology.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could expand my market if more people use advanced technology vehicles. I'm excited about the potential new lines of products.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired (Seattle, WA)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Retirement and changes in the auto industry don't concern me much, but the environmental benefits will likely improve my quality of life over time.
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 | 5 |
College Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 21 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is the future I want to be part of. It will frame my career and my studies significantly. The opportunities are exciting for my generation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1200000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1400000000)
Year 2: $1300000000 (Low: $1100000000, High: $1500000000)
Year 3: $1400000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $1600000000)
Year 5: $1500000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $1700000000)
Year 10: $1600000000 (Low: $1400000000, High: $1800000000)
Year 100: $1700000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $1900000000)
Key Considerations
- Broad impact on the automotive industry with potential shifts in consumer preferences and manufacturing processes in the US.
- Uncertainty in technological breakthroughs could result in variable cost effectiveness over the duration of the implemented programs.
- Dependence on state and local collaboration to meet bill objectives could present variability in execution.
- Volatility in the global energy markets may influence the net outcomes of the policy's impacts on emissions and petroleum substitution.