Bill Overview
Title: Healthy Climate and Family Security Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by establishing a program that caps the emissions of carbon dioxide and auctions carbon permits to producers or importers of crude oil, domestic or foreign coal operations, or certain natural gas entities. The bill also establishes the Healthy Climate Trust Fund for the proceeds of the auctions to be distributed as dividend payments to U.S. individuals.
Sponsors: Rep. Beyer, Donald S., Jr. [D-VA-8]
Target Audience
Population: Global population affected by climate change policy
Estimated Size: 330000000
- The primary global target population includes individuals concerned with or impacted by climate change due to the reduction in greenhouse gases.
- Climate change affects many aspects of life including health, agriculture, weather patterns, and sea levels, impacting global populations.
- The transition to a low-carbon economy will have socio-economic impacts on workers in the fossil fuel industry globally.
- The use of funds from carbon auctions to mitigate climate change can have positive implications for people worldwide.
Reasoning
- Individuals with varying degrees of dependency on fossil fuels and environmental consciousness will react differently to this policy. We need to represent both urban and rural populations as impacts on energy prices and dividend allocations may vary.
- Considering potential impacts, people employed in the fossil fuel industry might experience economic setbacks unless they find transitioned occupations. Thus, their wellbeing scores might initially drop.
- For these interviews, a Year 1 budget of $2.5 billion limits the payout per individual. With an estimated 330 million Americans affected, if the entire budget went to dividends, that’s about $7.57 per person. Over a decade, with $16 billion, this grows to about $48.52 per person.
- Some people may not perceive an immediate economic benefit from the dividend payments due to increased costs like energy, until more systemic economic shifts occur.
- Different regions of the U.S. may experience varied impacts based on energy source composition and economic dependence on fossil fuel industries.
Simulated Interviews
Oil Rig Worker (Houston, Texas)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I fear losing my job due to this carbon emissions cap.
- While I appreciate the intent behind the policy, it could cost people in my industry greatly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
School Teacher (Minneapolis, Minnesota)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill is a positive step forward for the environment.
- I am hopeful that the dividends can offset some of the increased energy costs.
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 |
Software Developer (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The economic incentives for going green are excellent.
- I believe this policy could lead to tech growth in sustainable fields.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Retired Coal Miner (Coal Township, Pennsylvania)
Age: 61 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The local community will suffer economically from this policy.
- I am unsure if the dividend can support us if energy prices rise.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
College Student (San Francisco, California)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns with what the planet needs.
- I'm concerned about how it might affect internships and jobs in green energy sectors positively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Chef (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 56 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about the rising costs of cooking-gas affecting my business.
- Dividends might not cover my increased operational costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired (New York, New York)
Age: 67 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill may help secure a better environmental future for younger generations.
- I'm worried about my fixed income covering any price increases.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Nurse (Raleigh, North Carolina)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Cleaner air will have health benefits for my community.
- I might not feel immediate economic benefit but care about long-term health impacts.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Chemical Plant Worker (Baton Rouge, Louisiana)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy threatens my job at the chemical plant.
- Unclear if the dividends could support me if I lose employment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Barista (Portland, Oregon)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy makes me hopeful for future environmental improvements.
- While I may experience minor cost increases, I believe they're for the greater good.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2500000000 (Low: $2000000000, High: $3000000000)
Year 2: $2000000000 (Low: $1600000000, High: $2400000000)
Year 3: $1800000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $2100000000)
Year 5: $1500000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $1800000000)
Year 10: $1200000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1500000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Key Considerations
- High initial costs for infrastructure and auctions that tapper as systems become automated and effective.
- Potential disruption in fossil fuel industries may necessitate economic transition supports.
- Dividends from permits could boost household income, mitigating effects from increased energy prices.
- Encouragement of low-carbon technologies can stimulate research and innovation.