Bill Overview
Title: NOPEC
Description: This bill prohibits a foreign state from engaging in collective action impacting the market, supply, price, or distribution of oil, natural gas, or any other petroleum product in the U.S. Specifically, a foreign state is prohibited from collective action that limits the production or distribution of such product, collective action to set or maintain the price of such product, or any other action that restrains trade of such product. Specified defenses such as sovereign immunity (i.e., a foreign state's immunity from the jurisdiction of U.S. courts) and the act of state doctrine (i.e., the prohibition of a court invalidating an official act of a foreign sovereign performed within its own territory) shall not apply to a foreign state's violation of this bill.
Sponsors: Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]
Target Audience
Population: People dependent on the global oil market
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The NOPEC bill targets foreign states that participate in oil-exporting cartels, like OPEC, that affect global oil supply and pricing.
- The bill seeks to address collective actions that limit the production, distribution, or price of petroleum products.
- It could, therefore, impact global markets by potentially increasing oil supply or decreasing oil prices if successful.
Reasoning
- The NOPEC bill aims to impact the global oil market by preventing foreign states from engaging in collective actions that influence oil supply and prices. This is likely to affect different segments of the U.S. population in varied ways, depending on their dependency on oil and gas, economic status, and geographical location.
- A significant segment of the U.S. population relies heavily on oil and gas for transportation, heating, and economic activities. Changes in oil prices can have cascading effects on the cost of living, particularly for low-income households and industries heavily dependent on oil.
- Urban populations may experience less direct impact due to diverse transportation options, while rural communities and those working in oil-dependent industries might face higher impacts from changes in oil economics.
- We need to account for diverse perspectives and economic conditions to understand well-being impacts accurately over time. The policy budget limits the scale of immediate effects, focusing more on long-term market shifts.
Simulated Interviews
Oil Rig Worker (Houston, TX)
Age: 44 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy could bring more stability to our jobs if it lowers oil prices and increases demand.
- However, there's a fear it might decrease the profit margins for U.S. oil companies, possibly affecting employment.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Financial Analyst (New York City, NY)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could shake up the energy markets positively or negatively, causing more volatility short term.
- I'm cautiously optimistic that it could widen investment opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 67 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If it means gas gets cheaper, I'm all for it!
- I'm worried about U.S. relations with foreign oil producers, though.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Software Engineer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support the policy as it disrupts monopolistic practices.
- I hope it accelerates a move towards sustainable energy options.
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 | 8 | 8 |
Truck Driver (Rural Kentucky)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Diesel prices are critical for my livelihood, any decrease would help.
- We have to watch how it plays out in the real market.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
School Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Indirectly, if transportation costs go down, it might ease our household budget.
- I'm cautious because the oil market is unpredictable regardless.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Independent Filmmaker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any policy cracking down on oil cartels seems positive if it supports lower emissions indirectly.
- I'm concerned about potential international trade tensions.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
College Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 18 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I mainly think of it in terms of how it might make commuting cheaper.
- Environmental impact is important but secondary in my current situation.
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 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Farmer (Bismarck, ND)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Agriculture is sensitive to oil prices, lower costs could ease operational expenses considerably.
- I'm worried about potential backlash affecting future oil availability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
IT Consultant (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 42 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any significant fluctuation in the oil market can affect travel expenses.
- I expect the policy to have limited immediate impact, but long-term could stabilize markets.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 2: $520000000 (Low: $310000000, High: $730000000)
Year 3: $550000000 (Low: $320000000, High: $760000000)
Year 5: $580000000 (Low: $340000000, High: $800000000)
Year 10: $650000000 (Low: $380000000, High: $870000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $1400000000)
Key Considerations
- The geopolitical implications and potential retaliatory actions from impacted foreign states.
- Long-term changes in energy markets could lead to shifts in the U.S. energy policy requirements.
- Legal actions may face significant international law challenges, affecting efficacy.