Bill Overview
Title: Coastal Communities Ocean Acidification Act of 2022
Description: This bill directs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to collaborate with state, local, and tribal entities that are conducting or have completed community vulnerability assessments, research planning, climate action plans, or other similar activities related to ocean acidification and coastal acidification and their impacts of ocean acidification on coastal communities. NOAA must (1) support collaborative interagency relationships and information at the state, local , and tribal level; and (2) assist state, local, and tribal entities in improving existing systems and programs to better address ocean acidification and coastal acidification and identify whether such activities can be used as a model for other communities.
Sponsors: Rep. Pingree, Chellie [D-ME-1]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals in Coastal Communities Worldwide
Estimated Size: 94000000
- Ocean acidification affects biodiversity and marine life, which in turn impacts industries reliant on these ecosystems such as fisheries and tourism.
- Communities directly in proximity to coastlines would be most affected, as their economy and lifestyle are intertwined with marine resources.
- Tribal entities often depend on traditional fishing and marine activities, thus are likely to be significantly impacted.
- The Act involves NOAA focusing resources and support to state, local, and tribal entities to manage and mitigate these impacts.
- Globally, there are numerous coastal regions each facing unique challenges with ocean acidification, impacting millions of individuals.
Reasoning
- The policy is aimed at addressing ocean acidification, which is a significant environmental issue affecting a large number of coastal communities in the United States.
- The cantril wellbeing scale is useful to assess life outlook, satisfaction, and general wellbeing in impacted areas. By comparing scores before and after the policy, we hope to measure perceived improvements.
- The affected population is diverse, including fishermen, tourism-related workers, indigenous tribes, and small business owners who rely on the ocean.
- Some people might not see direct impacts in the short term but could benefit in the long-term through improved resource management and resilience against environmental changes.
- With the budget restrictions, the greatest focus is likely to be on the most vulnerable communities first, which might exclude some less directly impacted but still concerned stakeholders.
Simulated Interviews
Marine Biologist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic that the Act can encourage more comprehensive research collaborations.
- This policy could provide more structured support to our environmental projects.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Fisherman (Miami, FL)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased collaboration could protect our livelihood which has been affected by changing ocean conditions.
- I'm skeptical about policy delivering meaningful change without direct support for small businesses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Tourism Agency Operator (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy could boost tourism through conservation efforts, indirectly supporting my business.
- Need assurance that funds will impact visible conservation efforts rather than just research.
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 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Graduate Student (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 25 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns with my research interests and could open more funding avenues.
- Excited for potential new data and collaboration opportunities but worried about administrative delays.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Indigenous Tribal Leader (Anchorage, AK)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hopeful that policy will support our ongoing sustainability efforts and cultural practices.
- Skeptical about how much influence local tribes will have in actual implementation processes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
Restaurant Owner (Charleston, SC)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could stabilize fish supplies and positively impact my business.
- Concerned about the timeframe for seeing tangible benefits.
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 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Software Developer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate the focus on environmental issues even though it doesn't directly impact my work.
- I hope it raises more awareness on the acidification issue.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
State Environmental Protection Officer (Salem, OR)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This collaborative effort could enhance our state's environmental programs.
- Policy success depends on clear communication and structured collaborations.
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 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Clam Digger (Cape Cod, MA)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could result in interventions that safeguard shellfish populations.
- I'm nervous that bureaucratic processes will bog down needed actions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 1 |
Retired Teacher (Corpus Christi, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe the act could enhance our conservation group efforts within the community.
- It's unclear how the funds will be distributed locally, which concerns me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $65000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $80000000)
Year 2: $67500000 (Low: $52500000, High: $82500000)
Year 3: $70000000 (Low: $55000000, High: $85000000)
Year 5: $75000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $90000000)
Year 10: $80000000 (Low: $65000000, High: $95000000)
Year 100: $160000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $190000000)
Key Considerations
- The scope of the NOAA's engagement and the extent of community improvements required.
- The variability in ocean acidification impact across different regions and communities.
- Potential partnership efficiency and effectiveness among federal, state, local, and tribal entities.
- Long-term commitment and consistent funding are crucial for maintaining program efficacy.