Bill Overview
Title: Federal Carbon Dioxide Removal Leadership Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Department of Energy to remove and permanently store, as is economically feasible, specified amounts of carbon dioxide on a specified schedule, culminating in 10 million net metric tons of carbon dioxide removal for FY2035 and each fiscal year thereafter.
Sponsors: Sen. Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE]
Target Audience
Population: Global population potentially impacted by climate change mitigation
Estimated Size: 330000000
- The bill targets carbon dioxide removal on a large scale, which is central to addressing climate change impacts.
- Climate change is a global issue, affecting worldwide populations through extreme weather, sea level rise, and ecosystem disruption.
- By aiming to reduce carbon dioxide levels, the bill indirectly affects every individual on the planet due to the global nature of the climate system.
- Mitigating climate change can improve air quality, agriculture productivity, and decrease health risks resulting indirectly from pollution.
Reasoning
- The simulated individuals vary in their initial Cantril wellbeing scores based on their socio-economic status, occupation, age, and locality.
- The population is diverse, with different levels of direct and indirect impact from the policy depending on geographic location and occupation.
- While the overall impact of the policy might be beneficial in slowing climate change effects, the perceived and immediate effects on individual lives will vary.
- Some of the people interviewed are directly involved in industries that might be affected by carbon removal technologies or their deployment.
- The policy budget is substantial, but when considering the broad impact area, resources must be allocated strategically to support those most affected or poised to benefit. These decisions can shape public perception and individual wellbeing.
Simulated Interviews
Energy Sector Analyst (California)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy is a crucial step forward for the energy sector. It could spur innovation and investment in new technologies, which is exciting.
- As someone who follows energy policies closely, I see potential for a significant positive impact in the long term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Beach Resort Manager (Florida)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Climate change has been threatening our coastline for years. Any action to mitigate this is welcome.
- However, I am skeptical if the changes will be timely enough to directly help our business's sustainability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Oil and Gas Worker (Texas)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could threaten jobs in my industry, including mine. There's always a lot of uncertainty with new environmental regulations.
- I understand the environmental need, but I'm worried about job security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Environmental Scientist (New York)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is an exciting development and falls in line with my research focus. It's good to see such commitment from the government.
- It shows a potential shift towards sustainable energy practices, which is promising for the future of our environment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Retired (Arizona)
Age: 65 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I haven't seen much impact in my day-to-day life so far from climate policies.
- I hope this will lead to a cleaner, safer environment for my grandchildren.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Farmer (Illinois)
Age: 57 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Changing climate impacts my crop yields and planting cycles, so any mitigation is beneficial.
- I'm optimistic that such policies will help stabilize weather patterns, but anxious about new regulations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Software Engineer (Washington)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy aligns with my company's mission and could drive more business opportunities.
- I see a positive environmental influence, which is encouraging for the industry and the planet.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Public School Teacher (Mississippi)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think education about climate is critical, and seeing real action will help support our curriculum.
- It's challenging to deal with preparedness surrounding extreme weather. Hopefully, this policy will mitigate future risks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Small Business Owner (New Jersey)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Business costs are a major concern, so I'm wary of indirect impact through taxes or regulations.
- Knowing the government is taking climate action is reassuring, as extreme weather could threaten my business operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Fisherwoman (Alaska)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've noticed the changes in fish behavior and availability due to warming waters.
- This policy could lead to healthier ecosystems and potentially boost my catch and income.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $750000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $1000000000)
Year 2: $1000000000 (Low: $750000000, High: $1250000000)
Year 3: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1750000000)
Year 5: $2000000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $2500000000)
Year 10: $2500000000 (Low: $2000000000, High: $3000000000)
Year 100: $2500000000 (Low: $2000000000, High: $3000000000)
Key Considerations
- Effectiveness of carbon dioxide removal technologies and their scalability.
- Public and private sector partnership effectiveness.
- Feasibility of meeting carbon removal targets per fiscal year.
- Potential changes in regulatory environment and public support for climate initiatives.
- Market dynamics within the clean energy and carbon capture sectors.