Enrique Pena Nieto Quotes

The 'environmental left' tells us that, though we have natural resources like natural gas and oil and coal, and though we can feed the world, we should keep those things in the ground, put up fences, and be about prohibition.

The problem is not that America does not have energy. The problem is that our government - alone among the governments of the world - will not allow its own people to recover the energy that they possess.

For decades, NRDC has created and supported policies that will ultimately end our reliance on fossil fuels.

Our society, our culture - the greatness of America - goes hand-in-hand with energy, and our leaders need to wake up. We need energy, OK?

I certainly would like to see the war on coal come to an end.

I say just put a big fat tax on carbon.

A healthy environment, a strong economy and energy independent America - that would be the purpose of my presidency, is break the strangle hold that people enjoy on fossil fuels who hate our guts.

Drill everything, mine everything, roll back regulations, tweak the science, expedite permits. Sound familiar? The Republicans offer up more 19th-Century solutions to our 21st-Century energy problems.

Our country has had a hard time learning that lesson with energy.

Ethanol's not an ideal fuel.

In reality, Republicans have long been at war with clean energy. They have ridiculed investments in solar and wind power, bashed energy-efficiency standards, attacked state moves to promote renewable energy and championed laws that would enshrine taxpayer subsidies for fossil fuels while stripping them from wind and solar.

New York and Connecticut belong to the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to cut carbon emissions, and New York City has been a leader in energy efficiency.

Energy consumption matters both to our environment and our economy.

The second thing is, if you want to do something about global warming, you have to think much more long-term. There is something wrong with saying we should start using renewables now, while they are still incredibly expensive.

As state and federal lawmakers debate the country's energy policies and Colorado's role in the ever-expanding energy economy, let's hope they remember that unnecessary regulations stifle growth while doing nothing for public safety or health.

The shift to a cleaner energy economy wont happen overnight, and it will require tough choices along the way. But the debate is settled. Climate change is a fact.

When the President was asked about global warming at a public appearance yesterday, he responded by talking about America's addiction to oil. You make the connection.

I personally think that a couple of pounds a week - maybe rising to almost £3 a week - is a reasonable price for Britain to achieve a degree of energy security to reduce its total dependence on fossil fuels and to honour its commitments to cut green house gases.

I think you could offer seven or eight different possible ends for energy policy. Climate change is one of them. Dealing with criteria pollutants is one of those related to that.

The discussion about energy options tends to be an intensely emotional, polarised, mistrustful, and destructive one. Every option is strongly opposed: the public seem to be anti-wind, anti-coal, anti-waste-to-energy, anti-tidal-barrages, anti-carbon-tax, and anti-nuclear.

Finally, we should help developing nations like China and India curb their exponentially increasing consumption of oil and natural gas, which is driving world prices higher.

The waste from power plants is essentially what is left over when you burn coal. And as we all know, coal is a relatively dirty mineral.

It's not an if - we're going to have to change. Oil is simply going to be gone.

We can eliminate gasoline in this country in 25 years.

If I were emperor of the world, I would put the pedal to the floor on energy efficiency and conservation for the next decade.