Bill Overview
Title: Earth Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses climate change by establishing requirements concerning renewable energy, zero emission vehicles, regenerative agriculture, and tax incentives related to climate transition costs. Specifically, the bill requires that by 2030, 100% of electricity sold by certain retail electric suppliers must be from renewable energy resources (e.g., wind energy); new motor vehicles (e.g., certain cars and trucks) sold by manufacturers must be zero emission vehicles; land and livestock managed by certain publicly-traded corporations must be managed with regenerative agricultural practices. The Department of Energy (DOE), the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Agriculture (USDA) must create grants to pay up to 50% of the costs of meeting those requirements. DOE must also issue regulations regarding the sourcing, recycling, and disposal of materials used to manufacture renewable energy sources (e.g., equipment that stores renewable energy). The goals of the regulations must be to (1) eliminate the use of rare earth metals in the manufacture of those sources, and (2) ensure the recycling of all such materials. USDA must issue regulations that (1) require the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from certain land or livestock corporations, and (2) ensure the well-being of animals raised for human consumption or the production of dairy products. The bill also provides tax incentives for electric suppliers, vehicle manufacturers, and such corporations to meet the requirements established by this bill by allowing them to double certain tax deductions for qualified capital climate transitions costs.
Sponsors: Rep. Espaillat, Adriano [D-NY-13]
Target Audience
Population: Global human population
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The bill aims for all electricity sold by certain suppliers to be from renewable sources, impacting energy consumers.
- It mandates all new vehicles to be zero emission by 2030, affecting vehicle manufacturers and buyers worldwide.
- Regenerative agriculture requirements will affect publicly traded corporations involved in agriculture and livestock.
- The bill seeks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, benefiting global populations affected by climate change.
- Tax incentives are offered to electric suppliers, vehicle manufacturers, and corporations in agriculture, encouraging compliance by reducing costs.
- The global effort to eliminate and recycle rare earth materials will impact multiple industries and contribute to environmental sustainability.
Reasoning
- The US population consists of various stakeholders, including energy consumers, vehicle manufacturers, agricultural corporations, and general consumers impacted by climate policy adjustments.
- Only a portion of the population will experience direct and substantial impacts, such as those employed in relevant industries or directly engaging in activities targeted by the policy.
- Most individuals will see indirect impacts through market changes such as energy prices and vehicle availability.
- The policy budget dictates the scale of grants and tax incentives, limiting the policy's direct financial burden on organizations and indirect effects on individuals.
- The policy aims for long-term impacts on climate and sustainability, which influence Cantril wellbeing scores over years.
Simulated Interviews
Energy company executive (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy's renewable energy mandate will drive innovation but require significant initial investment.
- With the grants covering 50% of costs, our company is in a strong position to meet these mandates and benefit from tax incentives.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Automotive engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am excited about the push for zero emission vehicles as it aligns with my job and personal values.
- The transition might be complex, but it's essential for a sustainable future.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Farmer (Des Moines, IA)
Age: 56 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Regenerative agriculture practices will increase operational costs initially.
- Access to grants can alleviate short-term financial strain, and these practices may enhance long-term sustainability.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Software developer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though not directly impacted, I appreciate the focus on climate action.
- Long-term, I expect these changes to contribute positively to community well-being.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Corporate consultant (New York, NY)
Age: 42 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy offers a unique business opportunity to advise clients on compliance and sustainability strategies.
- Adapting to zero emissions in vehicles and renewable energy supply is market transformative.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retired teacher (Denver, CO)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Concerned about potential increases in energy costs despite long-term benefits.
- The grants might buffer some cost increases, but immediate effects are worrying on a fixed budget.
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 | 7 | 4 |
College student (Miami, FL)
Age: 21 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Enthusiastic about policy measures as they align with my field of study and career aspirations.
- Positive impact on job market for environmental science graduates.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Public school administrator (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy will necessitate updates in educational content, which is positive for raising awareness.
- Resources may be redirected towards environmental education initiatives.
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 | 7 | 6 |
Logistics manager (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Concerned about the supply chain implications of renewable mandates.
- Efforts to comply with the policy could initially drive up costs and operation complexities.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Small business owner (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Transition costs could affect product prices and availability.
- Long-term benefits are clear, but managing inventory during change is challenging.
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 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000000 (Low: $12000000000, High: $18000000000)
Year 2: $15000000000 (Low: $12000000000, High: $18000000000)
Year 3: $15000000000 (Low: $12000000000, High: $18000000000)
Year 5: $15000000000 (Low: $12000000000, High: $18000000000)
Year 10: $15000000000 (Low: $12000000000, High: $18000000000)
Year 100: $15000000000 (Low: $12000000000, High: $18000000000)
Key Considerations
- The high upfront costs are significant, but the long-term benefits in terms of climate, health, and energy sustainability are substantial.
- Managing the transition period for affected industries and workforce must be strategically conducted to minimize disruptions.
- International coordination on materials recycling and sourcing can enhance the effectiveness of the bill's objectives, particularly with regard to rare earth elements.