Bill Overview
Title: EPA Regulatory Authority Act of 2022
Description: This bill provides that in identifying the best system of emission reduction for purposes of a standard performance under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency may include measures that apply beyond an individual stationary source or category of stationary sources. Additionally, the bill provides that each determination in the Clean Power Plan (i.e., the final rule titled Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units published in the Federal Register on October 23, 2015) with respect to a best system of emission reduction is deemed as authorized.
Sponsors: Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, Alexandria [D-NY-14]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals impacted by changes in emission regulations
Estimated Size: 330000000
- The EPA Regulatory Authority Act of 2022 will impact industries that are major sources of emissions, especially those involved in energy production like coal, natural gas, and oil industries.
- Policies originating from such acts tend to create shifts in the energy sector, influencing energy companies' operational costs and practices, potentially affecting job markets related to these sectors.
- The general population, especially those with health issues impacted by air quality, could see changes in their wellbeing due to stricter emission controls leading to cleaner air.
- Future generations will benefit from climate change mitigation strategies resulting in long-term wellbeing impacts.
Reasoning
- The EPA Regulatory Authority Act of 2022 targets emission reductions, impacting both industrial sectors and public wellbeing through cleaner air.
- Budget limitations imply selective application, likely focusing on high-emission industries initially before a broader implementation.
- Individuals in heavily polluted areas may notice immediate improvements in air quality, while others may not notice changes as quickly.
- Energy sector workers might face job shifts or retraining pressures due to potential closures or operational changes in older, high-emission generating plants.
- The healthcare sector might observe health improvements in populations due to better air quality, influencing wellbeing scores.
Simulated Interviews
Power Plant Technician (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about job security if there are changes to our plant's operations.
- Cleaner air could benefit my kids' health.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Environmental Engineer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act is a critical step towards sustainable energy systems.
- I’m optimistic about cleaner air and more renewable energy projects.
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 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Auto Industry Executive (Detroit, MI)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Compliance will be costly for manufacturers, but long-term savings from efficiency are possible.
- There might be some near-term production challenges.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Public Health Researcher (Pittsburgh, PA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improved air quality could lead to significant public health improvements.
- This policy can help reduce healthcare costs over time.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Startup Owner in Clean Tech (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy creates opportunities for clean tech innovation.
- Clear guidelines would help small businesses prepare better.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Healthcare Worker (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Patients could see immediate health benefits from cleaner air.
- Fewer smog alerts would be great.
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 | 8 | 5 |
Retired (Denver, CO)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improved air quality makes it easier to enjoy outdoor activities without respiratory issues.
- Living on a fixed income makes me cautious of any energy cost increases.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Teacher (Miami, FL)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like this encourage students to engage in sustainability initiatives.
- Real-world examples help in teaching environmental impacts effectively.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Regulatory changes often mean new costs or equipment standards to comply with.
- Businesses will need time to adapt.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Stay-at-home Parent (Charleston, WV)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’m concerned about my husband's job stability.
- Cleaner air is important for my children’s future.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $600000000 (Low: $480000000, High: $720000000)
Year 3: $650000000 (Low: $520000000, High: $780000000)
Year 5: $700000000 (Low: $560000000, High: $840000000)
Year 10: $700000000 (Low: $560000000, High: $840000000)
Year 100: $700000000 (Low: $560000000, High: $840000000)
Key Considerations
- Implementation involves both direct and indirect costs, including potential for litigation and resistance from affected industries.
- The balance between environmental benefits and economic impacts needs thorough assessment.
- Technology transfer and the ability of industries to adapt play critical roles in the overall success of such regulatory measures.