Mass. lawmaker files bill to reduce emissions linked to artificial intelligence

Representative David M. Rogers filed House Bill 495 with the Massachusetts House on Jan. 17, 2025, proposing a new Chapter 93M of the General Laws titled “Artificial Intelligence” aimed at reducing emissions associated with artificial intelligence. The bill would require affirmative user consent before search engines return AI- or generative-AI–produced results, direct state agencies to study AI’s environmental impacts, and require annual reporting of environmental metrics by covered entities, with penalties for failing to report.

The bill would insert Chapter 93M into the General Laws and defines key terms including “artificial intelligence,” “generative artificial intelligence,” “artificial intelligence model,” “artificial intelligence system,” “covered entity,” and “reporting entity.” It excludes government agencies that exclusively process government-provided information and exempts entities whose average annual gross revenues did not exceed $10,000,000 in the past three calendar years from the covered-entity and reporting-entity definitions.

Under the proposal, within 18 months of enactment no covered entity could operate a search engine that automatically returns AI-generated results for users unless each user first gives affirmative consent. The bill directs the Executive Office of Technology Services and Security (EOTSS) to recognize one or more centralized mechanisms that let individuals exercise affirmative consent. Those mechanisms must inform users of the choice, present the choice before an AI result is produced, allow a continuous choice for each query, be consumer-friendly and easy to use, be available in any language the covered entity uses for its products or services, and be reasonably accessible to people with disabilities.

The bill also directs the Secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EOEEA), in collaboration with the Secretary of EOTSS, to complete a comprehensive study on AI’s environmental impacts and publish the results within 18 months of enactment. The study would examine lifecycle energy consumption and pollution from AI models and hardware, data-center energy and water use for cooling, how design and deployment choices (including model efficiency, data-center location and power source, and hardware type) affect environmental effects, potential local acute impacts such as grid stress or water withdrawals, positive environmental uses of AI, possible negative or rebound effects, disparate impacts, and other impacts the secretary determines appropriate. The bill requires the study be submitted to legislative leaders and the chairs of the Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources and the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy and be made public.

Reporting requirements would apply to “reporting entities,” defined as entities that develop or operate an AI system or that own or operate, in whole or in part, a source of greenhouse gas emissions from a generator of electricity or a commercial or industrial site that powers AI systems used in Massachusetts (subject to the same $10 million revenue exclusion). Reporting entities must monitor and annually report the full range of environmental impacts caused by each product to EOEEA in a format determined by that office. Required disclosures include carbon emissions, water usage, electronic and other waste, material mining, and air, water and soil pollution, as well as any efforts to offset or mitigate impacts. The bill states those reports will be made public on the EOEEA website and provides that a reporting entity that fails to submit the annual report may be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $20,000 for each year of noncompliance.

The bill was filed with the House docket (House No. 495) and, per its cover text, was referred under the subject heading Economic Development and Emerging Technologies. The text does not show any committee action, votes, or formal adoption; it is a filed bill proposing statutory changes.

If enacted, the law would create new regulatory and reporting duties overseen by EOTSS and EOEEA, including the creation or recognition of consent mechanisms, development of reporting formats, and publication of reported impacts and the mandated study. The bill sets deadlines tied to enactment (18 months) for both the consent requirement’s implementation and the environmental study.