Tennessee House Bill HB2063

Tennessee 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/24/24
• Refer: 2/27/24
• Refer: 3/5/24
• Refer: 3/27/24
• Chaptered: 4/17/24
• Passed: 4/17/24

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 5; Title 6; Title 7; Title 8; Title 39; Title 42; Title 43; Title 44; Title 55; Title 58; Title 59; Title 60; Title 65; Title 68 and Title 69, relative to environmental protection.

Impact

The passage of HB 2063 is intended to bolster the state’s environmental protections by prohibiting unauthorized geoengineering activities within Tennessee. Given that the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation is responsible for regulating emissions and safeguarding public health, this bill is positioned as a measure to fill regulatory gaps around potentially harmful geoengineering methods. By clarifying the legal stance against such activities, the bill aims to create a safer and more predictable regulatory environment for both residents and local industries.

Summary

House Bill 2063 is an initiative in Tennessee aimed at amending the existing Tennessee Code Annotated to explicitly prohibit the intentional injection, release, or dispersion of chemicals into the atmosphere for the purpose of affecting temperature, weather, or sunlight intensity. The bill emerges against the backdrop of concerns regarding geoengineering practices, highlighting the lack of understanding around the potential risks these activities may pose to human health and the environment. The measure seeks to ensure that public welfare is prioritized in the face of emerging environmental technologies and practices.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 2063 appears largely supportive among the members of the General Assembly who advocate for environmental safeguards and public health protections. By establishing clear restrictions on geoengineering activities, proponents argue that it reflects a proactive approach to environmental management. However, there may be concerns or discussions around the balance between regulatory oversight and scientific innovation, as some factions might see this bill as potentially stifling legitimate scientific research in atmospheric sciences.

Contention

One of the notable points of contention surrounding the bill may arise from its implications on scientific freedom and innovation in environmental technology. While the intent is to protect public health and welfare, critics might argue that overly restrictive regulations could hinder advancements in geoengineering that may be beneficial under regulated conditions. Thus, the bill opens a dialogue about the need for oversight versus the necessity for innovation in addressing climate change and its associated challenges.