Joe Barton Quotes

Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy.

EPA can and should now focus on getting real results in the fight for clean air, land, and water.

My hope is that we continue to do an even better job in terms of our nation's energy policy, so that we may even further reduce our reliance on foreign sources of oil and take better care of our environment in the process.

Preventing global warming from becoming a planetary catastrophe may take something even more drastic than renewable energy, superefficient urban design, and global carbon taxes.

The more we focus on using renewable fuels, the less we are dependent upon foreign oil.

I think America understands that energy security is a very important part of our national security. But if we are going to address energy security in a meaningful way going forward, we need to do it in a new manner. We cannot just be doing the same old thing.

I have been working for years to promote a responsible energy policy that works to increase energy efficiency and invest in alternative and renewable energy sources.

We haven't had a good energy policy in this country for decades and we're trying to get one.

Our traditional oil and gas philosophy does not have conservation as a crucial component, and we can ill afford to continue to spend billions of dollars which are not reflected in the improved human capital of our country.

It seems the EPA has worked hard to devise new regulations that are designed to eliminate coal mining, coal burning, usage of coal.

Try everything. Do everything. Nuclear. Biomass. Coal. Solar. You name it. I support them all.

Technology has given us this wonderful opportunity to have low energy costs. We have to seize that, rather than keep debating and discussing and fighting over it.

We must commit ourselves to an 'all of the above' energy approach, with a major focus on increasing domestic production and expanding alternatives fuels, while increasing efficiency and conservation standards.

In my almost ten years in the House of Representatives, I have voted consistently to allow companies to drill for oil and natural gas in environmentally friendly ways.

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.

I don't need a strong EPA. I don't need to fund a lot of money there.

If the EPA continues unabated, jobs will be shipped to China and India as energy costs skyrocket. Most of the media attention has focused on the EPA's efforts to regulate climate-change emissions, but that is just the beginning.

The Nation needs to take a new approach to our energy problems.

In addition to the clean coal provisions, the energy conference agreement contains provisions instrumental in helping increase conservation and lowering consumption.

Cuts in carbon emissions would mean significantly higher electricity prices. We think the American consumer would prefer not to be skinned by Obama's EPA.

We need to do more to conserve fuel or face tougher choices such as steep price increase or even quantitative restrictions.

Our oil policy should be to find more and use less.

We can be thankful President Barack Obama is taking aim at one of the prime causes of climate change and extreme weather: air pollution. The EPA's carbon pollution standards are the most significant step forward our country has ever taken to protect our health by addressing climate change.

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.

People want smart energy policy.