Bill Overview
Title: To amend the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to increase the frequency of lease sales, to require replacement sales, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill amends the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to increase the frequency of lease sales for geothermal energy and requires replacement sales in any year where a lease sale is canceled or delayed.
Sponsors: Rep. Fulcher, Russ [R-ID-1]
Target Audience
Population: People impacted by geothermal energy lease changes
Estimated Size: 300000
- Geothermal energy sector impacts individuals working directly in the geothermal industry, including workers, investors, and infrastructure developers.
- Lease sales impact companies and individuals that participate in or invest in leasing geothermal resources.
- Replacement sales ensure continued opportunities and benefits for associated industries and communities reliant on geothermal energy development to maintain employment and operations.
- Expanding geothermal energy can affect energy consumers by potentially changing energy prices or availability if overall development and production change significantly.
- Environmental impacts of geothermal development can affect local communities around new projects.
Reasoning
- The policy mainly targets individuals and companies involved in the geothermal energy industry, which is prevalent in certain US regions with significant geothermal resources, such as California and Nevada. Thus, people in these areas are more likely to be impacted in terms of employment and investment opportunities.
- The policy's environmental and economic shifts could extend to surrounding communities, potentially affecting local economies, job markets, and ecosystems.
- While the policy may directly impact a relatively small, specialized segment of the population, indirect effects such as changes in energy prices or increased business opportunities could ripple out to a broader population over time.
- The budget constraints necessitate careful consideration of how the funding is allocated to maximize the initial setup and sustain the momentum of geothermal project developments over time.
- There will be varying levels of impact and perception of the policy, depending on one's proximity to the geothermal energy sector and attitudes towards renewable energy development.
Simulated Interviews
Geothermal Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is fantastic as it ensures we have continuous opportunities for project work and funding, which is crucial for the long-term success of the geothermal sector.
- The requirement for replacement lease sales in case of cancellations means more stability for our work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Real Estate Developer (Reno, NV)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increased lease sales may boost local economic activities, benefiting real estate interests like mine.
- There might be environmental concerns, but overall it should bring more business opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Electricity Provider Manager (Las Vegas, NV)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy secures a more stable path for integrating better renewable energy sources into our grid.
- Geothermal offers consistent power, unlike some other renewables, and this policy helps us plan for the future.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Environmental Scientist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While more geothermal development is generally positive, continuous sales could elevate environmental strain in sensitive areas.
- Close monitoring and regulations will be necessary to ensure developments are truly sustainable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Oil and Gas Consultant (Houston, TX)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increase in lease sales is a bold move to expand geothermal, though such changes won't significantly impact the dominant energy sectors immediately.
- However, it provides a new breadth of opportunities for those considering a shift towards renewables.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Geothermal Project Investor (Salt Lake City, UT)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More consistent lease offerings mean better predictability for investment returns and planning.
- This policy strengthens confidence in long-term renewable investments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Local Government Official (Boise, ID)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could boost local economies by creating jobs and investment in rural or less economically developed areas.
- There may be concerns about land use, but the advantages in sustainable development are significant.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Geothermal Drilling Technician (Denver, CO)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy means job security and potentially more work available for technicians like me.
- It's vital to have consistent projects to maintain employment levels and skill application.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Energy Policy Analyst (Austin, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The restructured sales approach is aligned with a forward-looking energy strategy, although coordination with existing regulations is crucial.
- Potential spike in geothermal development sends positive signals globally about US's commitment to renewables.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Environmental Activist (Sacramento, CA)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While geothermal offers clean energy, the policy needs transparency about environmental impacts and land use before full support.
- Promoting renewable energy solutions should include safeguards for minimal environmental disruption.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $5200000 (Low: $3100000, High: $7300000)
Year 3: $5400000 (Low: $3200000, High: $7600000)
Year 5: $5800000 (Low: $3400000, High: $8100000)
Year 10: $6800000 (Low: $4000000, High: $9500000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $6000000, High: $14000000)
Key Considerations
- The need for more frequent environmental reviews and compliance checks could impact regional resources.
- Balancing geothermal expansion with potential adverse environmental impacts will require careful planning.
- The policy can tap into existing efforts to improve renewable energy production, aiding overall climate change mitigation strategies.