Bill Overview
Title: Clean Shipping Act of 2022
Description: This bill directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to require vessels on certain commercial voyages to comply with standards for the carbon intensity of the vessel's fuel on a specified schedule, with vessels on such voyages utilizing 100% less than the carbon intensity baseline by 2040 and beyond. Additionally, the EPA must promulgate and continually revise standards to eliminate emissions of specified greenhouse gases and air pollutants associated with vessels at anchorage or at berth in the contiguous zone of the United States.
Sponsors: Rep. Lowenthal, Alan S. [D-CA-47]
Target Audience
Population: People impacted by emission changes in global shipping
Estimated Size: 100000000
- The global shipping industry is responsible for significant greenhouse gas emissions, contributing around 2-3% of global CO2 emissions annually.
- Efforts to reduce vessel emissions will impact ship owners, operators, and companies involved in international trade, including those based outside the US.
- People living in coastal areas around the world will benefit from reduced air pollution from vessels, improving air quality and reducing health risks.
- The shipping industry employs millions worldwide, and workers in this industry may face changes in their working conditions or job security as new technologies and fuels are adopted.
Reasoning
- The policy aims to significantly cut vessel emissions, thus benefiting environmental health and public health, particularly in coastal communities. The maritime industry workforce may be concerned about job security as the new regulations could lead to increased operational costs and technological shifts.
- The budget limit may restrict extensive technological overhauls initially but could incentivize the innovation of cost-effective low-emission technologies.
- Residents in coastal port cities may benefit from cleaner air, potentially improving public health and reducing healthcare costs related to pollution.
- Companies and individuals connected to the shipping and trade industries may experience business and economic impacts with potential fluctuations in the costs of traded goods.
- Effects on well-being will vary widely based on current exposure to maritime emissions, dependency on shipping for employment, and geographic proximity to affected water bodies.
Simulated Interviews
Dockworker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support the idea behind reducing emissions because I'm directly exposed to them in my job.
- I worry that if costs rise for shipping companies, it might affect job security for those of us on the docks.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Import/Export Agent (Houston, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If shipping gets cleaner it's better for my city, but it could make my job more complicated.
- I hope the policy leads to innovations that can help mitigate any cost increases.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retiree (Seattle, WA)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Less pollution would be good for my neighborhood.
- I worry about my investments in shipping companies if their profits take a hit from compliance costs.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Environmental Scientist (Miami, FL)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a step in the right direction towards reducing global shipping emissions.
- There might be challenges in implementation, but long-term benefits are worth it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Maritime Engineer (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A push for greener technology means job opportunities for engineers like me.
- However, smaller companies might struggle with the transition and cut jobs.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Logistics Coordinator (Brooklyn, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Lower pollution means better health outcomes for me.
- I'm worried about rising costs of goods if shipping becomes more expensive.
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 | 9 | 5 |
Graduate Student (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a beacon of hope for climate change mitigation.
- I hope it's implemented successfully and sets a precedent globally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Ship Captain (Norfolk, VA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The need for low-emission fuel is crucial, but the transition might be rocky.
- There might be logistical challenges that could complicate missions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Supply Chain Manager (Chicago, IL)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Maybe this policy will push for more efficient logistics systems overall.
- I'm worried about disruptions and increased costs impacting my business.
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 |
Environmental Activist (Boston, MA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is crucial for reducing maritime emissions and protecting coastal areas.
- It could empower more regions to adopt similar initiatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $80000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $120000000)
Year 2: $90000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $130000000)
Year 3: $100000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $150000000)
Year 5: $120000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $180000000)
Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $200000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $120000000)
Key Considerations
- International cooperation and alignment with global shipping standards will be critical to successful policy implementation.
- Potential resistance from the shipping industry could impact compliance and enforcement costs.
- The pace of technology development in low-carbon fuels will influence the actual costs and benefits of the policy.
- Public health improvements from reduced emissions must be weighed against the economic impact on shipping and related industries.