A scientist manipulates cultured meat samples in a sterile laboratory environment. (Getty Images)
Leslie Bonilla Muñiz , Reporter, and Niki Kelly, Editor-in-Chief, Indiana Capital Chronicle
Indiana’s Senate on Thursday decided to shelve lab-grown meat for a year while multiple state agencies study its safety.
And House lawmakers sent a carbon sequestration measure to Gov. Mike Braun’s desk without a funding compromise, while also advancing nuclear development.
Senators adopted an amendment saying no one can make, offer for sale, or sell a cultivated meat product in Indiana from July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026. Violators could be fined up to $10,000 a day.
Labeling requirements in House Bill 1425 prompted confusion in committee earlier this month. It sat on the second reading calendar for about two weeks, racking up amendments.
Sen. Jean Leising, R-Oldenburg, said she was working to find the right language.
“I believe we have come to the right point,” said Leising, the bill’s Senate sponsor. “There’s a lot of uncertainty of this product so I think this will give us time.”
The Indiana State Department of Agriculture, Indiana Board of Animal Health and Indiana Department of Health would study how safe lab-grown meat is and deliver a report to lawmakers by Dec. 1.
The legislation could get a Senate vote as soon as Monday.
To produce “cultivated” meat, manufacturers sample animal cells and multiply them in sealed vats, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The agency has allowed lab-grown meat sales since 2023, when it gave final approval to chicken-derived products by two California companies, Reuters reported.
Other states are also grappling with the issue.
A Montana proposal to ban lab-grown meat is moving in that state’s legislature. And lawmakers in North Carolina are considering a bill mandating that a “manufactured-protein food product” with an “identifying meat term” be labeled with an “appropriate qualifying term” — such as “cell-cultured,” “fake,” “lab-grown,” or “grown in a lab” — in large type.
Carbon measure finalized (kind-of)A measure tweaking Indiana’s carbon dioxide sequestration policies crossed the finish line Thursday on a 55-37 vote — but a separate measure striking a funding compromise is yet to come.
Rep. Ed Soliday told his colleagues, “You are voting (for) who is going to pay for the administration of a corporately owned sequestration pipe and well. And the choice is simple: if you vote for the bill, the corporation does; if you vote against it, your taxpayers pay for it.”
He’s the House sponsor for Senate Bill 457, which would exempt pipeline companies from needing to get certificates of authority in certain cases, create a permit for exploratory wells and well conversions; add inspection provisions; charge new fines for legal violations and tweak other fees.
Originally, fine and fee proceeds would’ve gone to dedicated funds to defray state spending on project administration and monitoring. But a Senate amendment directed the money to the state’s General Fund instead; House lawmakers didn’t consider two amendments filed to undo the changes or take a 50-50 approach.
While on the floor, Soliday said there “may be some correction.” He previously indicated that could come as a trailer bill.
Opponents were skeptical.
Rep. Matt Pierce, D-Bloomington, said the redirection “means there is no guarantee” that regulators will have the money to do the permitting, monitoring and other enforcement required by law.
And under Administrator Lee Zeldin, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has moved to give more states the power to self-regulate carbon dioxide injections and sequestration, recently approving a request from West Virginia.
If Indiana’s Department of Natural Resources wants that authority, Pierce said, it may need even more personnel and resources, not less.
Worries over how companies can skip certificates of authority also went unresolved.
Senate Bill 457 says they’re not required if pipelines and storage facilities stay within a property — even if they have impacts beyond those boundaries. In committee, Soliday said he “shared” Pierce’s concerns and said that would be part of the financial fix.
House Speaker Todd Huston, R-Fishers, said the legislation improves implementation of Indiana’s existing sequestration policies.
Asked how confident he was that the promised changes would materialize, Huston told reporters, “There are some things that were noted today in the debate, but I felt good about it. … Good to get that one across the finish line, get it to the governor, and we’ll work through a couple of the other issues.”
Nuclear-booster approved
A bill aiding early development work on emerging nuclear power technology also won acceptance from the House Thursday — although recent changes require Senate consent to send it to Braun’s desk.
Senate Bill 424 would offer public utilities working on small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) a path to recover 80% of pre-construction costs, including anticipated spending, from customers within three years — and before they obtain certificates of public convenience and necessity from the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission. The other 20% would be part of a general rate case.
Included are expenditures for design; engineering; environmental analyses and permitting; federal approvals, licensing and permitting; equipment purchases and more.
Soliday, also this bill’s House sponsor, said it’s not a giveaway to utility companies.
“The utility doesn’t just get to go out and start working on a small modular reactor and then collect the money from the ratepayers,” he told colleagues.
The legislation lays out a process.
Once the IURC gives a utility permission to start spending, the company would be able to request approval of a rate schedule to pass those costs on to customers. Regulators would have to approve if they find the costs reasonable in amount, consistent with their best spending estimate, and necessary to support SMR development.
Overspending wouldn’t get passed to ratepayers unless regulators deem the spending “reasonable, necessary, and prudent” in supporting reactor development.
Expenditures for canceled or abandoned projects wouldn’t be recoverable without the same “reasonable, necessary, and prudent” finding. Even so, a utility wouldn’t profit unless regulators also find the decision was “prudently made for good cause,” that profit is “appropriate … to avoid harm” to the utility and its customers; and that costs will be offset or reimbursed through other, listed means.
“All we’re doing here is actually helping the ratepayers,” Soliday said.
He argued that the legislation lets utilities “pay as they go, and the worst thing that happens is they get a much lower interest bond.”
Pierce, however, opined that it “unreasonably shifts the risk of an unproven technology” onto electricity customers. Most Hoosiers are served by one of the state’s “big five” investor-owned, regulated monopolies.
He cited one failed SMR project that would’ve required $1 billion in pre-construction costs.
“Here’s the thing that really bothers me,” Pierce continued. “If the utility knows that they’re going to bear the cost of a failed project, they’re going to think long and hard about whether it’s economically viable. … We’re telling them no problem, because we’re going to let you recover all those costs, and we’re going to define those costs in a fairly broad way.”
Senate Bill 424 advanced on a 59-30 vote.
Soliday’s committee deleted a Senate expiration date for the cost-recovery provisions, so the Senate must agree to the change before the legislation heads to Braun.
Identical language in House Bill 1007 is also expected to cross the finish line.
© Indiana Capital Chronicle, 2025 The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, nonprofit news organization dedicated to giving Hoosiers a comprehensive look inside state government, policy and elections. The site combines daily coverage with in-depth scrutiny, political awareness and insightful commentary.