Tennessee Senate Bill SB1033

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/25
• Failed: 3/26/25

Caption

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

Summary

SB1033 would prohibit weather modification activities in Tennessee by making it an offense to intentionally inject, release, or disperse chemicals, chemical compounds, substances, or apparatus into the atmosphere within the state for the express purpose of affecting temperature, weather, or the intensity of sunlight. It also makes it an offense to supply or provide the materials for that conduct when the supplier knows or has reason to believe they will be used for weather modification. The bill also directs the attorney general, local district attorneys, and certain state agencies to investigate credible reports of weather modification or related harmful consequences when such activity is suspected. It amends the emergency-management statute to include weather modification among the subjects state agencies may study at the governor’s direction, and it creates a specific penalty structure for violations.

Impact

The bill would add a new prohibition to Tennessee Code Annotated Title 68, Chapter 201, creating a misdemeanor offense for weather modification and a separate civil-style fine of $100,000 per violation assessed by the department. It would also expand the scope of emergency-mitigation studies under Title 58, Chapter 2 to include weather modification, and it would authorize investigations by the attorney general and district attorneys under specified circumstances. The measure would affect individuals or entities involved in cloud seeding or similar atmospheric intervention activities, as well as suppliers of related chemicals or equipment.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill faced significant opposition in committee and did not advance, failing in the Senate Energy, Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee by a 4-5 vote. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded floor or committee debate to indicate support arguments in detail. The vote outcome indicates the proposal was controversial and lacked enough support to move forward.

Contention

The main point of contention is the bill’s broad prohibition on weather modification and its inclusion of suppliers who may know or have reason to believe materials will be used for that purpose. Critics may view the language as overbroad or difficult to enforce, especially given the need to prove intent and the scope of what counts as weather modification. Supporters likely framed it as a public-safety and environmental protection measure, but the committee vote shows enough concern about the bill’s reach, enforcement, or necessity to prevent passage.