Bill Overview
Title: Methane Emissions Research Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a methane research pilot study to quantify methane emissions from infrastructure used for the production, gathering and boosting, processing, transmission, and storage of oil and natural gas in the United States.
Sponsors: Rep. Johnson, Eddie Bernice [D-TX-30]
Target Audience
Population: People worldwide affected by climate change-related impacts
Estimated Size: 330000000
- Methane emissions contribute significantly to climate change, which impacts global populations through environmental changes such as extreme weather, sea-level rise, and changes in agriculture.
- The bill focuses on methane emissions from oil and natural gas infrastructure, which are key components of energy production globally.
- Addressing methane emissions helps in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, subsequently benefiting individuals worldwide who may suffer the consequences of climate change.
Reasoning
- The Methane Emissions Research Act is likely to have a greater impact on those directly working in or living near oil and gas infrastructure, due to reduced local pollution and associated health benefits.
- Most individuals may not experience a direct, personal impact on their wellbeing in the short term, but the long-term benefits are linked to potential environmental improvements.
- The budget constraints indicate a limited immediate scope, focusing initially on study rather than direct emission reduction, so immediate personal impacts might be low.
- Considering the estimated US population affected by oil and gas operations, the commonness of significant personal impact from this specific policy is likely low.
- Wellbeing improvements would primarily arise from consequent policies resulting from research findings rather than the study itself.
Simulated Interviews
Environmental Scientist (Houston, TX)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a positive step in understanding and controlling methane emissions.
- I hope this will lead to stricter regulations and cleaner air.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired on Social Security (Grand Junction, CO)
Age: 64 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reducing emissions could improve my respiratory health.
- I am cautiously optimistic about this policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Corporate Lawyer (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support research into emissions, but this policy won't affect me directly.
- It's important for the future environment globally.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Gas Plant Operator (Williston, ND)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about job security if stricter regulations are enacted following this research.
- However, cleaner practices could improve work conditions.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Climate Change Activist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy's focus on research is a step towards transparency.
- I hope for action following results gathered.
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 |
Technology Consultant (Austin, TX)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Research is necessary, but without action it's limited in effect.
- I expect better energy policies post research.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
University Professor of Environmental Studies (Pittsburgh, PA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The collection of data is key to enacting effective environmental regulations.
- This could lead to significant future benefits.
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 | 9 | 7 |
Farmer (Rural Pennsylvania)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It’s hard to trust they will act on this research.
- We suffer from air quality issues already.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Data-driven environmental policy is essential, even if it doesn't affect me directly.
- Supporting research is the first step.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Petroleum Engineer (Boulder, CO)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might lead to innovations in reducing emissions.
- There’s a risk to current operational protocols.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $51000000 (Low: $41000000, High: $61000000)
Year 3: $52000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $62000000)
Year 5: $54000000 (Low: $44000000, High: $64000000)
Year 10: $59000000 (Low: $49000000, High: $69000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)
Key Considerations
- Accurate and extensive data collection is critical for the success of the pilot study.
- Collaboration with industry stakeholders might enhance data sharing and research outcomes.
- Long-term benefits from research findings could exceed initial investment costs.