Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4754

Bill Overview

Title: A bill to require the Secretary of Energy to conduct a study and submit a report on national resource adequacy, and for other purposes.

Description: This bill requires the Department of Energy to study the ability to meet aggregate electricity demand using supply- and demand-side resources. The study must address matters including (1) the effects of recent retirements of baseload electric generation on regional electric grids; and (2) uncertainty in future electricity demand trajectories from climate change, decarbonization, and other factors.

Sponsors: Sen. Braun, Mike [R-IN]

Target Audience

Population: All individuals and businesses utilizing electricity

Estimated Size: 331000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Renewable Energy Consultant (California)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm optimistic about the potential outcomes of this study, as it could provide vital information on integrating renewables more effectively.
  • I hope it emphasizes sustainable practices and pushes for more investment in renewable technology.

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 7 6
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Electrical Engineer (Texas)

Age: 33 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Electricity reliability is a major concern, especially during the summer months here.
  • While the study is great, I hope it leads to actionable improvements in grid management.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 4

Retired (Vermont)

Age: 66 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I appreciate that this study will look into supply issues, making sure we continue our high usage of renewables.
  • The policy seems forward-thinking.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Tech Startup Founder (New York)

Age: 28 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The opportunity for innovation in energy-tech is massive if this study indicates potential weaknesses in current systems.
  • I hope to see business incentives to be part of the solution following the study.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Manufacturing Plant Manager (Ohio)

Age: 53 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Reliability of electricity directly affects our operations and any improvements in this are welcomed.
  • I am hopeful the study will suggest ways to mitigate supply disruptions that hurt manufacturing.

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 9 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 4

Environmental Scientist (Florida)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The intersection of climate change and energy policy is critical; this study could underscore urgent needs.
  • Long-term planning based on the findings can only be beneficial.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

University Student (Illinois)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could open up more opportunities in the field I'm studying, with potential increases in research funding.
  • Knowing the grid's capacity to evolve with renewable integration is crucial for my career path.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Stay-at-home Parent (Georgia)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this study might relate to controlling costs of electricity, as expenses are increasing year over year.
  • The policy needs to translate into practical outcomes for families.

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 5 4
Year 10 5 4
Year 20 4 3

Retired Electrician (Pennsylvania)

Age: 71 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's important that studies like these don't stay as just reports but translate into actions, especially for stabilizing grids.
  • There's a wealth of knowledge already in the system, and we should be drawing on it more.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Policy Analyst (Washington State)

Age: 60 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is an important step to inform future policy decisions, but the focus should remain on actionable insights.
  • I would like to see more rapid deployment of recommendations that come out of studies like these.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)

Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)

Year 3: $3000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $4000000)

Year 5: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)

Year 10: $500000 (Low: $250000, High: $750000)

Year 100: $100000 (Low: $50000, High: $200000)

Key Considerations