Do you support the use of hydraulic fracking to extract oil and natural gas resources?

Yes

Yes, but increase oversight

Yes, but not in heavily populated areas

i dont even know what that means

Yes but only minimally and transitionally as we pursue renewables

Yes, apply appropriate oversight, no subsidies, and mandate cost of energy = cost to produce energy + cost to environment/cleanup .

It should be banned in some areas but not all

Yes, but only for now, not in the long term. We can’t realistically switch to clean energy at the snap of a finger, so we should use it now but gradually decrease it as we taper off fossil fuels in general in favor of green energy.

Yes, temporarily while we invest in cleaner alternatives

We should pursue more sustainable energy and research the long term effects of fracking. However, until it’s affordable and sustainable, we should limit it to less vulnerable areas.

Yes, with oversight to ensure public health is being negatively affected. Should move toward renewable energy

Yes, but companies should be held liable for negligence and damages to property and human life. Also, no more industry secrets. Citizens have a right to know what chemicals are being pumped into the soil.

Yes, oil and gas production is impossible without fracturing the rock formations. Similarly, geothermal absolutely requires 'fracking'.

No, but I think that we can use it since it seems helpful but the cost is very pricey and the government will need to figure the money out without raising taxes or other things that harms citizens.

yes, but technology should be required to contain contamination. We can send people to the moon, I think we can figure a way to contain fracking by-products.

Yes but it is vital that while we use this we should move more and more towards a more clean energy source

Yes, fracking should be used but it should be more heavily regulated and done where it does not affect those in communities.

No, fracking can cause environmental harm, including water contamination, earthquakes, and air pollution, and should be restricted.

We should use another tool because it’s tools could pollute the environment so maybe more environmental friendly ones are better

Yes, but we should also be looking at more sustainable energy resources to that we don't use all of our oil and natural gas. If we take too much we won't have any at all.

No because hydraulic fracking is very harmful to our environment and there's better ways to extract oil. Such as this one dude on youtube who learned how to make oil out of plastic.

It is bad for the environment, but I understand the economic benefits of mineral exploitation and the affects that we have on foreign and domestic markets.

No, but workers in the fracking industry should be provided training and opportunities for other careers

only if its actual trash. go to hilton head beach, there is so much random raw oil there on the sand

I support fracking but it needs to be studied further and if deemed bad for the environment alternatives should be researched

Yes but in areas where their is a lot of this and don't take too much because then we will end up with nothing

I think it should be more regulated but at the same time everything can be improved maybe we should find a way to use less water, reuse water, not to pollute the water, different ideas for this could work wonders. But im not saying get rid it of it all together.

As an AI, I do not have personal opinions, political stances, or the capacity to "support" or "oppose" a process like hydraulic fracking. Instead, I can provide a balanced overview of the arguments surrounding its use, including its environmental, economic, and health impacts, based on information from a variety of sources.

Yes, however increase the search for more sustainable energy resources to eventually replace these attempts.

Yes in certain amounts but we should also increase purstuit of more efficient and sustainable energy.

I doesn’t really matter to me, it’s better for the environment than producing electric vehicles as it stands right now.

Yes, with a strong investment in the pursuit of green/sustainable energy resources to eventually move towards.

I do but I think pursuing more sustainable energy resources should also be continued to see if the economy would be able to able to handle slowly converting to those resources because it could put people out of jobs (if successful) and if said new resource potentially gets sold the cost could harm/benefit the economy for better or for worse.

Yes, but in high moderation in only certain places and it should not be the main source of power for anything.

Yes until science and technology improve such that a seamless transition to more lucrative forms of clean energy can support the power demands of our nation

At this current state and time yes I support it, however once technology that reduces or removes the need for these fuels is invented then I will appose fracking, and no I don't mean the current electric cars that we have now as those are still largely ineffective and are significantly more expensive than gas cars

Yes but only as a temporary energy source to buy time for the widespread implementation of sustainable energy sources

We should phase it out, since the Permian basin used to have oil just below the surface, but now we need to go deeper and deeper and more and more expensive, and the longer we take to transition to sustainable energy, the harder it will be to switch.

we need to slowly introduce tiny sites for fracking in where we can produce but for the main reason of research then years down the line come to an actual decision.

we will hto do tsupply energy but we should be investing in better technologies so that harmful methods are no longer needed

Yes, unless it is proven to cause harm. Earthquakes and frack material seeping into water supplies have, at least, anecdotally been shown to have a relationship to fracking. Fracking should be allowed while at the same time supporting non-govt funded transparent investigations into the possible harms.

Yes but should be looking for ways to reduce fossil fuel use while we use racking to buy time for those technologies to mature.

It should not be in heavily populated areas, and we should go towards cleaner resources and Nuclear energy.

Fracking is a good source of energy for now, but I think we should pursue more renewable energy alternatives

Yes as a temporary means to keep energy costs down. But dramatically increase efforts to research more sustainable energy resources.

Only if it's the fastest most sustainable way to get natural resources as well as restricting the amount.

I think it is what they need to do to get gas easily but at the same time if it is seriously harming the earth, I then think that they need to find something new.

I don't think we should ban it outright, but we should work to transition to other sources of energy.

Find less toxic ways of handling fracking before continuing and study long term affects of what has already been done

No I think that they should instead find a way to not have to use chemicals so it isn't harmful to anybody.

we should still do it but not in areas where its going to destruct the beautiful scenery and wild life

Again I understand things such as fracking are temporarily beneficial to U.S. interests, but I would like to shift to nuclear energy as soon as possible to get off of dependence of such processes.

A mixture of yes and no. I think there should be better ways to gain energy, but we should do more research in order to make that happen, so for the time being, I think it's okay.

We need more earthly alternatives, like wind power, acid from rain, sun energy, I don't support, or not support this idea.

Pros and cons to everything in life just figure out the long term effects but dont stop the people from making money , dont make a bigger problem make a solution to keep money flowing and humans safe.

Yes, But for now until we have a strong enough renewable backbone to start switching off oil and natural gas.

our society was build on oil, and cannot be removed so easily, but efforts should be made to find new energy in the future

Yes, as long as the effects of resource extracting does not cause any harm in other natural supportive resources.

Yes but measures should be taken to prevent contaminated water that flows in into cities,towns,Etc..

No. However, let's boost efforts to make sure that the process is environmentally friendly and look for alternatives if needed

No we should invest more in alternative energy not just for environmental reasons but for the simple fact that fossil fuels are finite resources and the time to work on Plan B is not after we’ve completely exhausted fossil fuels.

No, we should pursue more sustainable resources instead. But, if these sustainable resources are not feasible to extract oil and natural gas resources, and it is necessary to acquire those oil and natural gas resources, then it is okay to use hydraulic fracking.

Kinda, but there shoukd be increased oversight, not done in heavily populated areas & we should pursue more sustainable energy resources simultaneously

More info needs to be presented to American citizens who still believe that the climate crisis is fake to show them the negative effects on all life on earth

I have mixed feelings about hydraulic fracturing (fracking). On one hand, it has helped increase energy production and reduce dependence on foreign oil, which can benefit the economy and energy security. On the other hand, fracking raises serious environmental concerns like water contamination, air pollution, and increased seismic activity. Because of these risks, I believe strict regulations and careful oversight are necessary if fracking continues. Balancing energy needs with protecting public health and the environment is essential.

Yes, but more info needs to be presented to American citizens who still believe that the climate crisis is fake

I don't think it's great for the environment but until we have other affordable to the average person energy sources I can't be mad at it

No, the research shows the long term effects of fracking are earth quakes through oklahoma and the southwest. Fracling has 0 benifit to our earth

Yes, but we should still try and find new and improved ways to get or have our recourses in order to prevent harsh climate change.

Fracking can be useful as a transition energy source, but it needs strict regulations to protect the environment and public health. Ultimately, investing more in renewable energy is key to a sustainable future.

Yes, but it should be heavily regulated and should be phased out for more sustainable energy sources such as wind or water.

Fracking should be heavily regulated and phased down. While it’s played a key role in U.S. energy independence, the environmental and health consequences are serious. Strict oversight is critical — and investment should increasingly shift toward clean, renewable alternatives.

We have many positive and negative points. And by learning about the negative points, I know they would have an impact on environmental pollution.

I support to an extent. I think the oversight of the operation should be increased as well as restrictions. I also believe we should add more sustainable engird resources.

Yes, but not in heavily populated areas in order to keep the citizens living in the area safe and also plan to end this when mostly everyone can afford renewable energy.

Maybe, if we can figure out a way to keep the environment safe while extracting oil at such a productive rate, it would be a lot better.

I do not fully understand the consequences of fracking. We can develop alternative energy programs however the Big Corporations still hold the whip hand

Long term I think it's a bad idea. However short term I tolerate it to improve US energy independence.

For the time being, given that it is necessary we should continue using it, however, greater attempts and efforts should be made to invest in more sustainable alternative resources. Moreover, the process should be strictly regulated and pose no harm to neighboring communities.

ABSOLUTELY NOT, fracking is known for being awful for the environment and there are no properly trained individuals to do it with causing major damage. Especially where it is wished to be done, BY WATER SOURCES, that's subjecting the people to literal poison and hazardous material.

No, Nuclear energy could be used as it is a natural occurring process that gets bad press based off of 1 catastrophic event

No, because it creates long-term problems for communities which would deplete what ever savings was made in the long run with long lasting negative effects.

Yes, so long as fracking does not occur within national forests and Native American lands, also nuclear energy must become our main source of energy

right now its what we use in everyday life its how our country functions but that doesn't mean we should keep that up. we should be looking at alternatives but until we find one then this will just have to do for now.

If we were to get rid of fracking, jobs would disappear and communities would perish. For example, communities in Texas, Pennsylvania, and North Dakota would suffer if fracking were to be banned.

Yes, it is okay. However, there needs to be more oversight, and clearly laid out plans to end the process in favor of more sustainable and clean sources for resources

I support fracking, because they provide energy and power to homes, buildings, factories, etc. if we were to get rid of these sectors of energy, jobs would disappear and communities would decay.

No, we need to spend more money and time into finding and perfecting alternatives for engery. But until then fracking should continue in unlocallized areas

Yes, but ensure the drilling is done properly to not contaminate water sources. Any and all contamination will be cause for enacting tort law.

Only do it with the intent to eventually phase it out and pursue alternative energy sources instead.

YES, BUT we should pursue more sustainable energy resources, in the short term its fine, but we do need to create a framework that is able to treat this issue in the long term