Bill Overview
Title: To allow the Secretary of the Interior to authorize geological and geophysical surveys for offshore oil and gas exploration.
Description: This bill requires the Department of the Interior to authorize certain geological and geophysical surveys related to oil and gas activities. The surveys must cover areas of the Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf that are not subject to existing moratoria on oil and gas leasing. Authorized surveys are deemed to comply with applicable laws to protect marine mammals and endangered species.
Sponsors: Rep. Graves, Garret [R-LA-6]
Target Audience
Population: People in Gulf of Mexico's economic and environmental sectors
Estimated Size: 4000000
- The bill focuses on offshore oil and gas exploration in the Gulf of Mexico, particularly areas not covered by existing leasing moratoriums.
- The main human population affected would include individuals working in or connected to the oil and gas industry in this region.
- It could also affect local communities living in coastal states bordering the Gulf of Mexico who might experience economic changes due to increased exploration activity.
- Tourism industries in these regions may also be indirectly affected by changes in local environmental conditions due to exploration activities.
- Furthermore, industries such as fishing that depend on the Gulf's marine ecosystem could also see impacts related to potential environmental changes resulting from these surveys.
Reasoning
- The primary impact of the policy will be on individuals working directly in the oil and gas industry, especially those in the Gulf of Mexico area. Many will likely see potential employment or job security improvements, resulting in increased self-reported wellbeing.
- Residents in the Gulf states may have mixed feelings, with some experiencing economic benefits through job opportunities or local business growth, while others might be concerned about environmental impacts.
- Fishermen and others dependent on the Gulf's ecosystem may perceive potential changes from the policy negatively, reflected in their wellbeing scores, due to concerns about environmental harms that can affect their livelihoods.
- People in the tourism industry might be worried about potential declines in tourist visits if the policy leads to perceived environmental degradation.
- Due to budget limitations, the policy's initial rollout may focus only on specific and strategically significant survey activities, affecting how broadly and deeply different population segments experience the impacts.
Simulated Interviews
Offshore drilling contractor (Houston, Texas)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy brings more work our way. With the dip in oil prices last year, things were uncertain.
- It's essential that we do these surveys right, to not just boost exploration but protect our marine environments.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Marine biologist (New Orleans, Louisiana)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The long-term environment must take priority over short-term economic gains.
- I worry that deemed compliance might not truly protect marine species.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 7 |
Fisherman (Biloxi, Mississippi)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I fear that more drilling might scare the fish away or harm their habitats.
- Without fish, there's no business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 5 |
Restaurant owner (Mobile, Alabama)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More jobs in the area could mean more customers for my business.
- On the flip side, if the seafood depletes, that's bad for business.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired, former oil industry executive (Destin, Florida)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This might be good for the economy, but we must be cautious about long-term environmental effects.
- I want a safe future for my grandkids, with good jobs and a clean environment.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Environmental lawyer (Corpus Christi, Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My aim is to ensure these surveys don't shortcut environmental laws torturing the marine life.
- I believe public trust shouldn't be lost for short-term gains.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Hotel manager (Gulfport, Mississippi)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I fear that exploratory activities might scare off the tourists who come to enjoy our natural beauty.
- It would be great if the oil boom brought more guests, but without harming what attracts them here in the first place.
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 |
Graduate student in marine conservation (Tallahassee, Florida)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial that these activities don't harm the Gulf's delicate ecosystems, which are already stressed.
- Responsible policy execution matters the most to balance economic and environmental interests.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
City council member (Panama City, Florida)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We need jobs, period, but not at the cost of the environment.
- I’ll be watching closely to see how this unfolds and impacts our community.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Oil and gas company analyst (Lafayette, Louisiana)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a necessary step to explore untapped resources, but the process must be responsible.
- I'm anxious to see how the energy sector adapts and stakeholders respond.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 2: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 3: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 5: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 10: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 100: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Key Considerations
- The environmental impact of surveys and subsequent exploration activities could be significant and may necessitate robust monitoring systems.
- Legal and regulatory compliance costs may vary depending on the interpretation of the 'deemed to comply' clause, particularly concerning marine mammals.
- The economic benefits depend greatly on the discovery and subsequent development of oil and gas resources, which are uncertain.
- The balance between economic benefits and potential environmental risks or damages will influence long-term impacts.