Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4983

Bill Overview

Title: BIDIRECTIONAL Act

Description: This bill establishes requirements to encourage the deployment of vehicle-to-grid and vehicle-to-everything technologies and applications that enable bidirectional charging, such as technologies that enable electric vehicles to use their batteries to power the energy grid or homes when they are not being driven. Specifically, the bill requires states to consider measures to promote vehicle-to-grid integration under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act. The bill also directs the Department of Energy to establish a grant program for projects that use at least one electric school bus with such technology. Grants may be awarded to electric energy suppliers, state public utility commissions, school bus manufacturers, school districts, suppliers of charging infrastructure, renewable energy developers, and other eligible entities.

Sponsors: Sen. Hickenlooper, John W. [D-CO]

Target Audience

Population: People using or reliant on vehicle-grid integration and related energy systems

Estimated Size: 350000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Electric Vehicle Owner (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I am hopeful that the BIDIRECTIONAL Act will help stabilize the energy grid and give EV owners like myself additional ways to utilize our vehicles.

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 7

Public School District Administrator (Columbus, OH)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As we transition to electric buses, this policy could lower operational costs and reduce emissions for our fleet.

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 9 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 8 6

Software Engineer (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy seems primarily focused on vehicle owners, so I don't see a direct benefit for me right away.

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 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Construction Worker (Austin, TX)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Transitioning the grid is fine, but the costs of electric vehicles are still out of reach for many workers like me.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Electric Grid Operator (Chicago, IL)

Age: 51 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Integrating EVs into the grid is essential for future energy solutions. This policy might accelerate those capabilities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired Farmer (Rural Alabama)

Age: 65 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 19/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I don't think the policy affects life here much. We don't rely on fancy energy tech out here.

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

City Planner (New York, NY)

Age: 24 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This act could potentially reduce congestion by making electric vehicles more practical in urban settings.

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 9 6
Year 20 8 6

Renewable Energy Developer (Portland, OR)

Age: 33 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Innovations in grid management facilitated by this policy can enhance renewable energy deployment.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

School Bus Manufacturer Employee (Miami, FL)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The market shift to electric buses is challenging but necessary, though it raises job security concerns for many.

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

Public Utility Administrator (Seattle, WA)

Age: 56 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This legislation supports our ongoing transition to a smarter and more resilient grid, which is crucial for future consistency.

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 10 8
Year 10 10 8
Year 20 9 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $400000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $500000000)

Year 2: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)

Year 3: $600000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $700000000)

Year 5: $700000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $800000000)

Year 10: $800000000 (Low: $700000000, High: $900000000)

Year 100: $1500000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $1700000000)

Key Considerations