Bill Overview
Title: American Energy Independence Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses U.S. energy independence, the production and importation of oil and natural gas, and the rescission of specified environmental requirements. Specifically, the bill directs the President to develop a plan for the United States to achieve energy independence by 2024. The Department of Energy (DOE) must also develop a program and issue rules to ensure that the United States achieves such energy independence and becomes a net exporter of energy. The bill also addresses energy pipelines, including by approving the TransCanada Keystone Pipeline in Phillips County, Montana for the import of oil from Canada to the United States. It also provides for energy production, including by requiring regulations to be issued by DOE to reduce requirements on entities harvesting energy through hydraulic fracturing, the Department of Transportation to promote stable and affordable gasoline and diesel prices, and the Department of the Interior to promote the leasing of federal land for oil and natural gas production. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must identify and repeal certain regulations that substantially reduce energy independence. Further, the bill prohibits the use of any funds to implement the Paris Agreement on climate change. Finally, the bill rescinds (1) Executive Order 14008 about tackling climate change, (2) the 2021 proposed rule issued by the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers about the scope of the Clean Water Act, and (3) the 2021 proposed rule issued by the EPA about methane gas emissions.
Sponsors: Sen. Hawley, Josh [R-MO]
Target Audience
Population: People affected by changes in U.S. energy independence policies
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The bill impacts people employed in the oil and natural gas industries, as it seeks to increase production and reduce regulatory requirements.
- It affects consumers of energy in the U.S., potentially influencing their energy prices as the country aims for energy independence.
- The workforce involved in hydraulic fracturing will also be directly impacted as regulations are adjusted.
- Communities near federal lands might experience changes due to increased oil and natural gas production activities.
- Globally, countries involved in exporting energy to the U.S. or competing with the U.S. for energy production will be impacted by shifts in U.S. energy policies.
- Individuals and communities concerned with environmental policies and climate change might be affected by the regulatory rollbacks, such as rescinding executive orders related to climate action.
Reasoning
- The policy is highly relevant to individuals employed in the oil and gas industries, with many potentially seeing an increase in job stability and wages due to increased activity and reduced regulations.
- Consumers in general will feel the impact through changes in energy prices. Those in energy-intensive occupations or who commute long distances may see notable effects.
- Fracking communities may experience economic benefits but also health-related concerns due to possible increased environmental pollutants.
- People residing near planned pipeline regions could have diverse perspectives, balancing economic opportunities against environmental concerns.
- Environmental advocates are likely to show concern over increased fossil fuel extraction and the rollback on climate action measures.
Simulated Interviews
Oil Rig Worker (Houston, Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel this policy will secure my job for many more years.
- Energy independence is a critical goal for our nation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Environmental Scientist (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill is a step back for climate policy.
- I'm concerned about the increased carbon footprint.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 5 |
Hydraulic Fracturing Technician (Williston, North Dakota)
Age: 52 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Easing fracking regulations will likely boost local job opportunities.
- However, I'm worried about what this means for environmental safety.
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 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Software Developer (Portland, Oregon)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I had hoped for stronger support for renewables, not fossil fuels.
- I'm concerned about the environmental implications.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired Teacher (Miami, Florida)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this policy reduces energy prices, it could be a relief for our budget.
- Environmental risks concern me, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Bismarck, North Dakota)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 18.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Relaxing regulations boosts my business prospects.
- It should lead to stable market conditions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Graduate Student (New York, New York)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is disastrous for my hopes of a green energy future.
- The focus should be on sustainable energy initiatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 9 |
Nurse (Fargo, North Dakota)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More local jobs can stabilize our community.
- However, I worry about potential environmental health impacts on patients.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Truck Driver (Fairbanks, Alaska)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this drives fuel prices down, my costs will be easier to manage.
- Economic stability is crucial for my livelihood.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Environmental Policy Analyst (Baton Rouge, Louisiana)
Age: 46 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy contradicts essential climate strategies.
- There is a risk of increased industrial emissions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $3000000000 (Low: $2500000000, High: $4000000000)
Year 2: $2500000000 (Low: $2000000000, High: $3500000000)
Year 3: $2000000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $3000000000)
Year 5: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2500000000)
Year 10: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 100: $200000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $300000000)
Key Considerations
- Legal challenges and costs could arise from repealing environmental regulations and executive orders.
- Global energy markets might respond unpredictably, impacting U.S. energy export potential and prices.
- Environmental impacts from increased energy production may lead to long-term financial and health costs.