Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3815

Bill Overview

Title: SAVE Consumers Act of 2022

Description: This bill addresses emergency energy conservation authorities and petroleum reserves, including by increasing the authorized amount of strategic petroleum reserve drawdown and sale for FY2023.

Sponsors: Sen. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA]

Target Audience

Population: Consumers of energy worldwide

Estimated Size: 330000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Software Engineer (Austin, Texas)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might help reduce energy costs, which is great since I drive a lot for work.
  • I'm considering upgrading my appliances to more energy-efficient ones if incentives are provided.

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 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 7

Car Manufacturer Manager (Detroit, Michigan)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might push for a shift towards more fuel-efficient vehicle production, which means more work in the R&D department.
  • It could lead to changes in our manufacturing line, potentially securing jobs but with added pressure for innovation.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 4 5

Environmental Policy Analyst (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The SAVE Consumers Act can drive major shifts in consumer behavior if implemented effectively, promoting both energy savings and emissions reduction.
  • It aligns well with sustainability goals, which is encouraging.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Small Business Owner in Energy Appliances (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could provide opportunities to expand my business with new energy-efficient product lines.
  • However, I'm worried about increased competition from big-box retailers who can adjust prices more flexibly.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 4

Retired (Miami, Florida)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If this policy can genuinely lower my energy costs, I would be very relieved as finances are tight.
  • I would support any measures that make appliances and vehicles more efficient.

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 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Grad Student in Environmental Science (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 23 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As someone studying environmental science, I'm interested in how this policy might drive systemic change in energy use.
  • It might not directly impact me immediately, but it's necessary progress.

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 8 7

Electrician (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 33 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • With more demand for energy-efficient appliances and systems, I expect business to grow.
  • This policy is likely to create more work opportunities for electricians.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Petroleum Engineer (Bismarck, North Dakota)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Any policy affecting petroleum reserves could mean changes in my daily work and investment returns.
  • It prompts both job insecurity and potential market shifts.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Public Transport Operator (New York, New York)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While I don't own a car, energy efficiency policies can still affect public transport operations positively.
  • Policies like this might offer funding or incentives to upgrade our transport systems.

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 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 8 8

Environmental Lawyer (Houston, Texas)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could spark a lot of legal work if companies violate new efficiency standards.
  • There might be an increase in demand for legal services in the energy sector.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $2000000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $2500000000)

Year 2: $1600000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $2000000000)

Year 3: $1700000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $2100000000)

Year 5: $1800000000 (Low: $1400000000, High: $2200000000)

Year 10: $2000000000 (Low: $1600000000, High: $2400000000)

Year 100: $2500000000 (Low: $2100000000, High: $2900000000)

Key Considerations