Tennessee House Bill HB1112

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/25
• Refer: 2/10/25
• Refer: 3/5/25
• Refer: 3/11/25
• Engrossed: 3/25/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 58, Chapter 2 and Title 68, Chapter 201, relative to weather modification.

Summary

HB1112 amends Tennessee law to specifically define and prohibit certain forms of weather modification. The bill makes it an offense to intentionally inject, release, or disperse chemicals, chemical compounds, substances, or apparatus into the atmosphere within Tennessee for the express purpose of affecting temperature, weather, or the intensity of sunlight. It also prohibits supplying those materials when the provider knows or has reason to believe they will be used for that purpose. The bill also directs the attorney general, local district attorneys, and relevant state agencies to investigate credible reports of violations or harmful consequences of emergencies where weather modification may have occurred. A violation is classified as a Class A misdemeanor, and the Department is required to assess a civil fine of $100,000 per violation, with each act of dispersing or supplying materials treated as a separate violation. The act takes effect July 1, 2025, and applies only to conduct on or after that date.

Impact

HB1112 would add a new weather modification offense to Tennessee Code Annotated Title 68 and expand emergency-related study responsibilities in Title 58. It creates criminal and administrative penalties for intentional atmospheric chemical dispersal aimed at changing weather or sunlight, and it authorizes investigation by the attorney general and district attorneys when credible reports arise. The bill affects individuals or entities involved in cloud seeding, geoengineering, atmospheric testing, or the provision of related chemicals or equipment, and it gives state agencies a clearer statutory basis to respond to alleged weather modification activity.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have received generally favorable support in committee and on the House floor, advancing by comfortable margins at each recorded vote. The subcommittee and full Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee both recommended passage, and the House passed the bill on third consideration by a substantial vote. The vote pattern suggests broad support, though not unanimous, indicating some concern or skepticism among a minority of members.

Contention

The main point of contention is the bill’s premise that weather modification should be criminalized and heavily fined, which may raise questions about scientific evidence, enforcement, and the scope of the conduct covered. The broad language covering intentional atmospheric dispersal and the supply of materials based on what a provider “knows or has reason to believe” could be viewed as expansive and potentially difficult to apply. Supporters appear to favor precautionary regulation and enforcement authority, while opponents likely worry about overbreadth, unintended impacts on legitimate research or environmental activities, and the practicality of proving intent.