Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3530

Bill Overview

Title: REEShore Act of 2022

Description: This bill establishes a strategic reserve of rare earth metals and rare earth metal products and sets out other requirements related to rare earth metals. Specifically, the bill requires defense contractors to disclose the provenance of rare earth metal permanent magnets and restricts the use of rare earth metals sourced from China in certain defense items and services. Additionally, the U.S. Trade Representative must investigate China for unfair trade practices related to the rare earth metals market, and the Department of Defense must report on efforts to reduce the dependence of U.S. allies on non-allied sources of rare earth metals.

Sponsors: Sen. Cotton, Tom [R-AR]

Target Audience

Population: People reliant on rare earths for economic and technological activities

Estimated Size: 450000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Defense Contractor (San Diego, California)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is a necessary step to ensure national security and reduce dependency on foreign critical materials.
  • However, it will require significant adjustments in sourcing materials, which could increase costs in the short term.

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

Renewable Energy Engineer (Boulder, Colorado)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could impact our supply chain, but it might also spur innovations to find alternative materials or recycling methods.
  • I'm concerned about the initial costs and how they may affect project budgets.

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 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Rare Earth Metals Mining Consultant (Houston, Texas)

Age: 51 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The move to establish a domestic reserve will increase opportunities in U.S. mining operations.
  • It will take time for local operations to scale, and there could be growing pains related to regulatory and environmental compliance.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 5

Tech Startup Founder (Mountain View, California)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm worried about potential cost increases for rare earth components, which could affect pricing and competitiveness.
  • On the other hand, a more diversified supply chain could lead to greater stability in the long run.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Automotive Industry Analyst (Detroit, Michigan)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Auto manufacturers will need to reevaluate material sources; this could result in both challenges and opportunities.
  • Long-term, the policy could enhance domestic production capabilities and reduce risks associated with foreign dependencies.

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

Retired Engineer (Miami, Florida)

Age: 58 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having worked in defense, I see the need to protect critical supply chains from global disruptions.
  • This seems like a prudent measure, though I hope it will be managed efficiently and transparently.

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 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Environmental Advocate (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 26 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Transitioning sourcing could either strengthen or weaken environmental protections, depending on execution.
  • There is an opportunity here to lead by example in sustainable practices, but it must be carefully managed.

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

Supply Chain Manager (Richmond, Virginia)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could mean renegotiating with existing suppliers and potentially finding new ones, which is resource-intensive.
  • It would be great to have more stability and fewer disruptions from geopolitical issues.

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

Financial Analyst (New York, New York)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • From a financial perspective, this could introduce short-term volatility in the rare earth markets.
  • If managed well, it could lead to more stabilized prices and possibly a good investment environment in the domestic sector.

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 8

Teacher (Raleigh, North Carolina)

Age: 33 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Although the policy doesn't affect me directly, I believe it's important for students to understand how geopolitical issues influence everyday technologies.
  • It's an interesting case study in resource management and economic strategy.

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 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)

Year 2: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 3: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 5: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)

Year 10: $400000000 (Low: $350000000, High: $450000000)

Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Key Considerations