Bill Overview
Title: NO RUSSIA Act of 2022
Description: This bill provides statutory authority (and reallocates funding) for the Office of Nuclear Energy to establish a strategic reserve of uranium to ensure the availability of domestic supplies of uranium. The bill also requires the office to establish another program to support domestic production, conversion, and enrichment of uranium for nuclear reactors and eliminate reliance on Russian uranium. The office may not source uranium for the reserve or the program from companies that are controlled by, owned by, or otherwise affiliated with China or Russia.
Sponsors: Sen. Barrasso, John [R-WY]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in the uranium production and nuclear energy sector globally
Estimated Size: 50000
- The bill aims to establish a strategic reserve of uranium for domestic use in the USA, impacting domestic suppliers of uranium.
- It eliminates reliance on Russian uranium, affecting international trade relations between the U.S. and Russia.
- The bill impacts uranium producers, converters, and enrichers in the USA.
- The restriction against Chinese and Russian affiliated companies affects international companies in the uranium sector.
Reasoning
- Uranium production and nuclear energy sectors are niche industries with limited direct employment impact, so not everybody will be affected by the policy.
- The policy's focus is to boost domestic uranium production and reduce reliance on foreign sources, potentially affecting domestic job and economic stability.
- Environmental concerns may arise from increased domestic uranium mining, influencing public opinion and wellbeing scores.
- Impact on international trade and diplomacy, particularly regarding Russia, can also have indirect economic effects.
- Some citizens will be unaffected directly by the policy as they are not involved in the nuclear or uranium industries, but may indirectly experience some national energy security benefits.
Simulated Interviews
Uranium Miner (Colorado)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this act will create more job opportunities.
- If my company wins contracts to supply this reserve, our job security would increase.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Nuclear Policy Analyst (New York)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act could help strengthen U.S. energy independence, but we must monitor environmental impacts.
- The budget allocation is significant; we need transparency on how it will be spent.
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 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Energy Consultant (Texas)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could be a boost for domestic uranium clients I advise.
- However, reliant sectors will need time to adjust to new supply chains.
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 |
Environmental Activist (Utah)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Concerns about ecological effects of increased mining.
- The policy could lead to greater environmental degradation if not managed properly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Retired Nuclear Engineer (California)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The shift away from Russian imports is prudent.
- A strategic reserve could have minimized past disruptions, so I'm hopeful.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Nuclear Reactor Operator (Illinois)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could ensure a reliable supply of uranium.
- Operational stability should improve with diversified resource sourcing.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Graduate Student (Oregon)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The act is a mixed bag; while it bolsters energy security, environmental safeguards are needed.
- Academic studies may increase in this field, offering research 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 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Local Government Official (New Mexico)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy can boost the local economy if new mining projects are initiated.
- Environmental concerns must be balanced with economic incentives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Manufacturing Worker (Michigan)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think this act affects my job.
- It may help national energy independence, but that's abstract to me.
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 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Lobbyist (Washington DC)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act represents a shift to favor domestic industry, which is beneficial for my clients.
- It may accelerate nuclear energy's repute in the cleaner energy category.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $520000000 (Low: $420000000, High: $620000000)
Year 3: $550000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $650000000)
Year 5: $600000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $700000000)
Year 10: $750000000 (Low: $650000000, High: $850000000)
Year 100: $2000000000 (Low: $1800000000, High: $2200000000)
Key Considerations
- Dependency on Russian uranium currently places the U.S. in a vulnerable position, making this act crucial for national security.
- Establishing the strategic reserve and supporting domestic suppliers will have significant upfront costs, but potential long-term economic benefits.
- Objectives of energy independence align with broader U.S. policy goals, potentially garnering support from various stakeholders.