Bill Overview
Title: Replenishing Our American Reserves Act
Description: This bill requires the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to only include petroleum products produced in the United States. It also directs the Department of Energy to only sell petroleum products from the SPR to entities within the United States.
Sponsors: Sen. Sullivan, Dan [R-AK]
Target Audience
Population: People impacted by global petroleum market changes
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The bill focuses on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), a critical component of U.S. energy policy and emergency response.
- Entities involved in the production, distribution, and consumption of petroleum products in the U.S. will be directly impacted by this legislation.
- The U.S. petroleum industry, including drilling companies, refineries, and distribution networks, will be influenced by the requirement that SPR only include U.S.-produced petroleum.
- The legislation may impact global petroleum markets by altering U.S. import/export balances, affecting international suppliers who previously contributed to SPR.
- Economically, consumers may be impacted if the changes lead to fluctuations in fuel prices within the United States.
Reasoning
- The policy impacts primarily the petroleum industry in the U.S., including workers in drilling, refining, and distribution sectors.
- While the global petroleum market may face changes, U.S. consumers and industries will see the most direct effects due to changes in supply chains and potential price fluctuations.
- Those employed in or dependent on U.S. oil production might find increased job security or demand, improving their economic and personal well-being.
- Some consumers may experience higher fuel prices if domestic supply is insufficient to meet demand or if costs of domestically sourced petroleum are higher.
- Long-term impacts on international trade relationships & pricing mechanisms set the strategic interests of certain governmental and corporate groups.
- Budget constraints suggest limited outreach or direct public benefits programs, focusing likely on incentivizing domestic production rather than direct subsidies or consumer benefits.
Simulated Interviews
Petroleum Engineer (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the ROAR Act is a great step for enhancing national energy security.
- It could stabilize the jobs here if we prioritize production stateside.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Logistics Manager (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Fuel prices are critical for my business; any disruption worries me.
- Domestic exclusivity on SPR oils might limit price spikes if managed well.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Environmental Activist (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act could incentivize more oil drilling, counteracting renewable energy goals.
- I hope for habitat preservation and less environmental impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Economist (New York, NY)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This legislation might affect our trade balance and leverage.
- Relying internally could insulate us economically from external shocks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Retired (Chattanooga, TN)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any increase in fuel costs will impact my limited budget.
- I hope it stabilizes prices locally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Renewable Energy Consultant (Denver, CO)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The ROAR Act could be seen as a setback for clean energy initiatives.
- I hope it doesn't deter investment in renewables.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Truck Driver (Chicago, IL)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm just worried about the gas price by the pump going up because of new regulations.
- If it leads to shortages, that'll be rough on my livelihood.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 7 |
Petroleum Company Executive (Dallas, TX)
Age: 56 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Localizing our oil reserves is definitely in our strategic interest.
- Could spur investment in more rigs and site expansions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Automotive Factory Worker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased costs for fuel could spill over to commuting budget and more.
- Long-term changes might affect vehicle production stability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (Seattle, WA)
Age: 43 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope my distribution costs don't rise too much.
- If managed well, it might stabilize my expenses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Year 2: $180000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $220000000)
Year 3: $160000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $200000000)
Year 5: $130000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $170000000)
Year 10: $80000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $120000000)
Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $8000000)
Key Considerations
- Impact on international trade relations and existing petroleum import agreements.
- Potential need for increased federal investment in infrastructure to support new sourcing regulations.
- Effect of changes in fuel prices on the broader economy and household budgets.