Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9027

Bill Overview

Title: Ocean Restoration Research and Development Act of 2022

Description: This bill directs the Department of Energy (DOE) to establish a pilot program for the research and development of ocean replenishment and restoration technologies and techniques that have the potential to achieve regional-to-global scale ocean restoration, enhancement of fisheries, conservation of marine mammals, and emissions reductions. DOE shall prioritize activities that take place in pelagic waters and will not stimulate phytoplankton production that causes or accelerates harmful algal blooms in coastal waters. Pelagic waters means the part of the open sea or ocean other than coastal waters.

Sponsors: Rep. McKinley, David B. [R-WV-1]

Target Audience

Population: People dependent on or benefiting from healthy ocean ecosystems

Estimated Size: 20000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Fisherman (Miami, Florida)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy sounds promising as it could enhance fish stocks, but the benefits seem way into the future.
  • I'm worried that the budget might not be enough to notice changes soon.

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 9 6

Marine biologist (San Diego, California)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The added funding for ocean research can greatly enhance our understanding and efforts in marine conservation.
  • I hope this leads to more job opportunities in my field and tangible environmental benefits.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 9 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 10 7
Year 20 10 7

Tourism operator (Anchorage, Alaska)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Efforts in ocean restoration could improve marine life populations, boosting tourism in the long run.
  • I'm optimistic but cautious because the scale and timeline mean immediate effects aren't likely.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 8 5

College student (College Station, Texas)

Age: 22 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like this increase hope for a sustainable future.
  • Such initiatives can open new career opportunities for young professionals like me.

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

Restaurant owner (New Orleans, Louisiana)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If the policy truly helps fish populations recover, it could be great for my business.
  • It's hard to say if provincial policies would have local impacts due to the scale of this bill.

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 5
Year 20 8 5

Environmental advocate (Portland, Maine)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is a significant commitment to marine health! It gives hope for long-term ocean sustainability.
  • We need strong monitoring to ensure goals are met and not just theoretical.

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 10 7

Software developer (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 28 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Investing in ocean restoration aligns with broader environmental goals that I support.
  • The effects on day-to-day life are indirect, but it's satisfying to know this work will benefit future generations.

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 7 6

Charter boat operator (Honolulu, Hawaii)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Restoration of the ocean ecosystems is crucial for the survival of my business.
  • I hope the introduced technologies will create a direct boost in my fish-dependent operations.

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 5
Year 20 8 5

Retired educator (Boston, Massachusetts)

Age: 65 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Any step towards sustainable ocean management is a step in the right direction.
  • I'm excited to see indirect benefits on weather patterns and biodiversity as a result.

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 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Journalist (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 54 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Official measures towards ocean restoration are an essential narrative for environmental journalism.
  • I anticipate significant coverage potential around tech innovations in ocean conservation.

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 9 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $40000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $60000000)

Year 2: $45000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $65000000)

Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $70000000)

Year 5: $-1 (Low: $-1, High: $-1)

Year 10: $-1 (Low: $-1, High: $-1)

Year 100: $-1 (Low: $-1, High: $-1)

Key Considerations