Quote

I'm not a scientist. If there is a risk to our environment, there will be no fracking.

Government attempts to ban fracking should be aborted. The government should lift the burdensome regulations that have made the construction of nuclear power plants excessively expensive, thereby freeing up even more natural gas for direct use or for methanol manufacture.

Environmentalists should like fracking for its relative cleanliness. But they don't. They have made a bugaboo out of the chemicals in fracking fluids, which supposedly can leach into groundwater sources. I'm convinced they're dead wrong. Ultimately, good technology with a cost advantage will win out over paranoia.

Fracking opens up vast tracts of the U.S. to exploitation by gas drillers. There's enough energy under our feet to last us for decades, maybe centuries.

Fracking is an incredible risk to the human race, I don't know why they even thought of doing it.

Hydraulic fracking is very much a necessary part of the future of natural gas.

Fracking has been used for more than 60 years to successfully drill over a million oil and gas wells in the U.S. Nonetheless, the prevailing mythology on the radical left is that the technology is 'poisoning our children' by polluting the water we drink and the air we breathe.

Fracking has been a real technological change that has caused great innovation in our business, and we've had the benefit of very low gas prices for our customers as a result of that.

How do we take the bad out of fracking? How do you contain the water? How do we make a profit out of that? Get there early.

A lot of the basic research that helped us figure out fracking came from the federal government.