Bill Overview
Title: AMAZON21 Act
Description: This bill establishes the International Terrestrial Carbon Sequestration Program to support projects in developing countries that reduce emissions and enhance carbon sequestration from forests and other terrestrial ecosystems.
Sponsors: Sen. Menendez, Robert [D-NJ]
Target Audience
Population: People living in developing countries where forest and terrestrial carbon sequestration projects will be implemented
Estimated Size: 332000000
- This bill focuses on projects in developing countries, targeting emissions reduction and enhancing carbon sequestration.
- People in developing countries dependent on forest ecosystems will be impacted.
- Populations involved in forestry and agriculture may face changes in their livelihood and practices.
- Everyone globally, including populations in countries not directly part of the projects, may benefit from reduced emissions and enhanced carbon sequestration.
Reasoning
- Given the international focus of this policy, we must recognize that the direct impacts within the US are primarily indirect and related to global emissions reductions.
- This simulated population will be biased toward awareness and concern for climate change, which may make their perspectives more favorable than the average American.
- The budget constraints mean the impact on US wellbeing is subtle, primarily impacting those with significant interests in international climate initiatives and industries.
- Individuals in the environmental sector or those promoting sustainable practices may see an increased professional interest and validation in their work.
- The policy itself does not implement domestic changes, so immediate impacts on daily life in the US will be less pronounced.
Simulated Interviews
Environmental Scientist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this policy as a critical step toward addressing global climate change.
- Though the impacts are distant, they contribute to a healthier planet for everyone.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Petrochemical Engineer (Houston, TX)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like AMAZON21 may lead to shifts in global energy demands impacting my industry.
- I understand the need but worry about job impacts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Finance Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic about policies like this boosting green tech markets.
- Aligns with my personal values and professional investments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired Teacher (Miami, FL)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I like that we're taking steps to protect our planet.
- Sometimes feel policies like these are too abstract to feel real.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Urban Planner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Such global policies are vital to comprehensive sustainability.
- This policy indirectly supports my beliefs in global-local strategies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Climate Researcher (Boston, MA)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's gratifying to see these policies take shape after years of advocacy.
- Their global scope validates much of my life's work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Such acts inspire me to continue on my chosen career path.
- There's hope for the future if we commit internationally.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Farmer (Denver, CO)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support these initiatives as they might help buffer climate impacts.
- Concerns are often local, but global fixes are needed too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Tech Entrepreneur (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- International support for carbon sequestration boosts clean tech innovation.
- Good for business and my mission.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Fishing Guide (Anchorage, AK)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Changes might preserve more traditional livelihoods by conserving environments.
- Indirect, but any positive change could help ice conditions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $550000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $650000000)
Year 3: $600000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $700000000)
Year 5: $650000000 (Low: $550000000, High: $750000000)
Year 10: $700000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $800000000)
Year 100: $700000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $800000000)
Key Considerations
- The success of carbon sequestration projects is closely linked to international cooperation and governance framework efficiency.
- Long-term carbon offset impacts depend on the maintenance and integrity of implemented projects.
- Potential political and economic relationships may evolve as a result of U.S. participation.