Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3915

Bill Overview

Title: Mining Schools Act of 2022

Description: This bill establishes a grant program for mining schools to recruit students and enhance educational programs, including those related to critical mineral and rare earth element exploration, extraction, and refining.

Sponsors: Sen. Barrasso, John [R-WY]

Target Audience

Population: People in educational and professional sectors related to mining, minerals, and rare earth elements

Estimated Size: 500000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Mining Engineering Student (Colorado)

Age: 21 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this grant will improve the resources and technology we have access to in our labs.
  • More funding could attract more students like me who are passionate about sustainable mining.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Professor of Geology (Nevada)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This funding is a step in the right direction to modernize our curriculum and attract new talent.
  • There have been long-standing gaps in funding for the mining education sector which this helps address.

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 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Geologist in Training (West Virginia)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Better educational programs will produce better-prepared graduates, which is beneficial.
  • But I'm skeptical about how soon these changes will actually impact my career or opportunities.

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 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Policy Maker (Virginia)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This grant program aligns with the need to secure the U.S. as a leader in mining technologies.
  • However, we need to ensure effective implementation to create tangible results.

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 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Environmental Consultant (Arizona)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While education improvement is good, I'm worried this could lead to more aggressive mining practices without environmental safeguards.
  • There needs to be a balance in advancing mining technology and protecting the environment.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Prospective College Student (New Mexico)

Age: 19 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Scholarships or better programs would make me more inclined towards enrolling in mining-related studies.
  • This policy could potentially impact my future career decisions if the opportunities are compelling.

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 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Mining Company Executive (Michigan)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improving educational programs will benefit our industry long-term by providing a skilled recruiting base.
  • Immediate effects might be limited but the potential workforce advantages are significant.

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 9 8

Engineer in Mining Equipment Manufacturing (Pennsylvania)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If the educational program leads to advances in mining technology, it can improve safety standards.
  • It might take time, but these improvements can indirectly benefit my field by fostering innovation.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

High School Counselor (Montana)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could help diversify career choices for students interested in science.
  • New programs might encourage students to consider careers they previously hadn't thought of.

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 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Sustainability Analyst (California)

Age: 32 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could improve the quality of education in critical areas like rare earth elements.
  • But significant impact depends on balancing educational focuses and industry demands.

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: $10000000 (Low: $7500000, High: $15000000)

Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $7500000, High: $15000000)

Year 3: $10000000 (Low: $7500000, High: $15000000)

Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $7500000, High: $15000000)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations