Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/5205

Bill Overview

Title: Abandoned Well Remediation Research and Development Act

Description: This bill requires the Department of Energy to establish a research, development, and demonstration program with respect to (1) data collection on the location of abandoned oil or gas wells; (2) the plugging, remediation, reclamation, and repurposing of the wells; and (3) strategies to mitigate potential environmental impacts of documented and undocumented abandoned wells.

Sponsors: Sen. Lujan, Ben Ray [D-NM]

Target Audience

Population: Communities living near abandoned oil and gas wells

Estimated Size: 5000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Environmental Scientist (Houston, Texas)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe the policy is a critical step in protecting our local environment.
  • There's been a significant concern over the pollution from these wells.
  • It's reassuring to see government intervention, but proper implementation is key.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 10 4

Oil Rig Operator (Tulsa, Oklahoma)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm optimistic about the policy, anything that improves our health and environment is a plus.
  • Communities like ours need more attention on these forgotten sites.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Software Engineer (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 43 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I don't see a direct impact on my life.
  • It's interesting but not something I worry about daily.

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 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Teacher (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm hopeful this policy can reduce some of the risks associated with abandoned wells around here.
  • It could mean a safer environment for future generations.

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 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 5

Retired (Baton Rouge, Louisiana)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • We've seen what these wells can do, and it's high time something serious is done.
  • I'm cautiously optimistic, hoping for real change.

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 8 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 5

Environmental Lawyer (Anchorage, Alaska)

Age: 44 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is a necessary policy for future legal and environmental standards.
  • I'm interested to see how efficiently this is executed in scattered communities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Student (Fairbanks, Alaska)

Age: 19 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think it's a good move but it doesn't really impact me.
  • Hopefully, it'll improve conditions for some communities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Nurse (Oklahoma City, Oklahoma)

Age: 46 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If implemented properly, this policy could significantly improve public health.
  • We've needed a dedicated effort like this for a long time.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Farmer (Rural Pennsylvania)

Age: 57 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could really help save my land from further damage.
  • I've been anxious about losing crop quality due to contamination.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 4
Year 5 9 4
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 9 3

Entrepreneur (Dallas, Texas)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see the environmental benefit but question the economic impact and practicality.
  • My day-to-day won't change much.

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 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 8 7

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $21000000 (Low: $18000000, High: $25000000)

Year 2: $21000000 (Low: $18000000, High: $25000000)

Year 3: $21000000 (Low: $18000000, High: $25000000)

Year 5: $21000000 (Low: $18000000, High: $25000000)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations