Bill Overview
Title: Fueling Our Nuclear Future Act of 2022
Description: This bill modifies provisions under the Energy Act of 2020 concerning high-assay, low-enriched uranium (HALEU), including by directing the Department of Energy (DOE) to (1) establish a program to accelerate the availability of commercially produced HALEU in the United States, and (2) accelerate or initiate activities to make HALEU available from DOE's inventories for use by advanced nuclear reactors.
Sponsors: Sen. Barrasso, John [R-WY]
Target Audience
Population: People associated with the nuclear energy industry and its associated communities
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The bill involves the production and availability of high-assay, low-enriched uranium (HALEU), primarily impacting those involved in the nuclear energy industry.
- Operators and companies within the nuclear energy sector will be directly affected by this bill as it seeks to enhance the availability of HALEU.
- The operation of advanced nuclear reactors relies on the availability of HALEU, thus impacting energy producers looking to adopt newer technologies.
- Communities and populations in proximity to nuclear facilities may experience indirect impacts regarding employment and economy.
- Individuals advocating for nuclear power and those opposing it due to safety concerns constitute part of the population potentially affected.
Reasoning
- The consideration of diverse backgrounds within the nuclear energy sector is crucial for estimating the policy's varied impacts on Cantril wellbeing scores. While the policy mainly targets the nuclear energy sector, affecting operators and suppliers directly, its broader effects can be economic improvements in local communities and potential safety concerns among residents nearby nuclear facilities.
- Those directly working in or with nuclear facilities likely perceive a direct positive impact due to increased job security and business operations from HALEU accessibility. Conversely, individuals opposed to nuclear energy or with environmental concerns may exhibit anxiety or negativity towards the policy.
- The limited budget requires the policy to strategically impact the most critical areas of HALEU production and dissemination, leading to more pronounced effects near specific nuclear facilities or regions with advanced reactor development.
Simulated Interviews
Nuclear plant operator (Charlotte, NC)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a great push for the industry.
- It makes our future much more secure.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Nuclear engineer (Richland, WA)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill will certainly boost my current projects and support future advancements.
- It should create more jobs and secure our research endeavors.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Energy policy analyst (Chicago, IL)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a pivotal moment for U.S. nuclear policy but raises questions about long-term waste management.
- It is a step forward for energy independence.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Community health advocate (Augusta, GA)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm cautious about more nuclear material being used, but hopeful about hearing jobs may come to our area.
- I want more safety protocols if this goes forward.
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 | 6 | 6 |
Nuclear physicist (Los Alamos, NM)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased HALEU availability could really propel my research.
- There's a lot of hope for sustainable energy with this.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Environmental activist (Hobbs, NM)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am deeply concerned about the increased focus on nuclear power.
- We should invest in renewables to prevent future waste problems.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 2 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 4 |
Nuclear facility operations manager (Knoxville, TN)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This eases the supply chain issues we face with reactor fuel.
- It's a positive step for the stability of operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Graduate student in nuclear physics (Seattle, WA)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy creates future job opportunities and supports my research focus.
- It's reassuring for my career prospects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
HALEU supply chain manager (Aiken, SC)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finally, some movement on HALEU availability! This will greatly help streamline our operations.
- Looking forward to fewer delays.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Local business owner (Santa Fe, NM)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased nuclear activities might benefit local businesses through new contracts and worker spending.
- It brings some economic stability to the community.
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 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 2: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 3: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 5: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 10: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 100: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Key Considerations
- Ensuring public safety and environmental standards are adhered to is crucial in nuclear policy deployment.
- The competitive landscape for domestic HALEU production compared to international suppliers.
- Potential technological and economic benefits derived from leadership in HALEU production and advanced nuclear technologies.