Scott Pruitt Quotes

Electricity is derived from many non-renewable energy sources like oil, natural gas and coal.

We will work on maximizing the introduction of energy conservation and renewable energy, while lowering our dependence on nuclear power generation as much as possible.

We see natural gas as an important part of the electricity generation mix for many decades to come.

Nearly all of our existing power sources are generators which use a heat cycle. This includes our coal, oil, and gas fired utilities, our automobiles, trucks, and trains, and even our nuclear fission utility power plants.

I support an all of the above energy policy, so that's not only just Keystone, that's not only just drilling, that's clean coal, that's safe nuclear.

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

If we don't continue to pursue alternative, emissions-free energy sources like nuclear fuel, we are at risk of increasing our dependence on costly natural gas.

I'm an advocate for a full spectrum of energy policy, but we're never going to get there with solar cells that are going to power this country.

Our nation's power plant fleet must include a mix of solar, wind, hydro, natural gas and nuclear plants.

If we are to meet the growing electricity demand in the United States without significantly increasing emissions of greenhouse gases, we must maintain a diverse supply of electricity, and nuclear power must be part of that mix.

I strongly support an 'all-of-the-above' energy policy that includes additional development of wind, clean coal, and bio-fuels.

There are no coal plants on the drawing board for Duke, which leaves us with gas, renewables, and nuclear.

With the increasing demand for oil around the world and the rising costs in Oregon and throughout the nation, we must focus on the development of alternate energy sources, especially those that are clean, efficient and renewable.

It's going to cost trillions of dollars to rework the energy sources all over the world. Were going to have to move away from fossil fuels.

Gas is by far and away the most important element of our energy policy.

People say we're running out of energy. That's only true if we stick with these old 19th century technologies. We are awash in energy from the sunlight.

There is no need for nuclear. The world can be powered by wind, water and sun alone.

Natural gas obviously brings with it a number of quality-of-life environmental benefits because it is a relatively clean-burning fuel. It has a CO2 footprint, but it has no particulates. It has none of the other emissions elements that are of concern to public health that other forms of power-generation fuels do have: coal, fuel oil, others.

Because we are now running out of gas and oil, we must prepare quickly for a third change, to strict conservation and to the use of coal and permanent renewable energy sources, like solar power.

I support strongly the expansion of nuclear power because that is one of the key ways of getting electricity generated and reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

As a former governor, I am familiar with the challenge of balancing the immediate electricity and heating needs of our citizens with the long-term priority of ensuring that power comes from a diverse mix of energy sources that allows us flexibility as we fight the effects of climate change.

Nuclear power is cost-competitive with other low-carbon technology and is a crucial part of our energy mix, along with new sources of power such as shale gas.

The sun doesn't shine at night, and wind power is highly variable. To meet our emissions goals, we're going to have to grasp every arrow in the quiver, and nuclear is one of those arrows.

I think the likelihood that combustion will continue to represent the large portion of the power unit world is very small.

In Congress, I've advocated for an all-of-the-above energy policy that identifies and promotes alternative energy sources such as wind, solar, biomass and hydropower.