[ASSURAS] Earlier we said that at the rate we're using energy now, shale gas has the potential to supply U.S. gas needs for the next 100 years. Does that mean it will be the biggest piece of the natural gas pie in the future? Well, let's check the "energyNOW!" Reality Meter. Shale gas was a tiny part of the entire natural gas picture just two decades ago -- in fact, it barely existed. Thanks to fracking, it hit 14% in 2009, but let's fast-forward to 2035. By then, the Energy Information Administration says, shale gas will provide almost half of all the natural gas we use.

Natural gas, many say, can and should be the answer to reducing the nation's foreign oil dependence and its carbon pollution. Now, the New York Times' investigation into the environmental risks from fracking has lawmakers asking questions about who's overseeing how we get the gas.

New Jersey Congressman Rush Holt is one of the congressmen leading that charge. But Representative Michael Burgess sees the gas industry as a good neighbor. He represents the Dallas-Fort Worth area, right in the middle of the Barnett Shale, where companies have been fracking for years. Thanks to both of you gentlemen for joining us.

I will start with you, Congressman Burgess, because there's the New York Times exposé. There's the Energy Committee's own investigation about diesel fuel going into fracking sites and demands for more study. Is fracking safe?

[BURGESS] I think what you have to consider is, when I came to Congress in 2003, there were a lot of people who were really concerned that we did not have adequate amounts of natural gas, that it was going to be a problem to create fertilizer chemicals, and we heard it all the time. Now, fast-forward seven years' time, and we have an abundance. So clearly this is an industry that has undergone rapid, rapid change. Now, I will tell you that there are problems and some of the problems stem simply from the fact that people are not convinced that their welfare is being protected.

[ASSURAS] In your state, if I could interrupt, natural gas fracking has, in fact, the natural gas has seeped from fracking sites into underground drinking water in Texas, among five states. What do you tell your constituents?

[BURGESS] I think that's a bit of an overstatement of the problem. There are some concerns down in Parker County, which is just south of where I represent. There was a case that attracted a lot of attention the early part of December, and, actually, this points up some of the tension between the federal regulators and the state regulators.

[ASSURAS] Is EPA the problem? You are asking for more study of fracking by the EPA and you're calling it more robust study. And the question is, has the EPA fallen down on the job?

[HOLT] I'd say, so far EPA has not caught up with the scale of the problem. And, in fact, no one has. I think the drilling is getting ahead of itself. This is the point you were making. It's grown by multiples of a hundred. And yes, it has been used for years. Many energy extractors can say, "We've done this for years without incident." But never on this scale.

[BURGESS] The developers themselves, should they wish to continue this exercise -- and this is what I stressed to the president of Conoco before our committee during the Deepwater Horizon hearings. You guys have to be certain that this is done in the best possible way.

[HOLT] But they're tripping over themselves to do this rapidly.

[BURGESS] I would disagree -- The technological changes that are occurring within the fracking fluid itself -- diesel, it's found, is no longer necessary. There are vegetable oils that can be used.

[HOLT] But as recently as 2009, there were 30 million gallons in more than a dozen states used, and so, yes, okay, if the practice is getting better, that should become the standard immediately.

[BURGESS] I wouldn't disagree with that. But at the same time, the developers are going to be much more facile and agile about this than are either state agencies or federal agencies. And you know, the EPA, there is no more nakedly political organization than the EPA right now. They've declared war on my state in Texas. Their word is worth nothing in my state.

[HOLT] Well, I don't accept either of those points, but the point is that, I mean, drinking water should be kept safe. It's one of the things that, for nearly a century, America, the United States of America, stood out in all the world as the country where you could turn on the tap and be assured that you had drinkable, in fact, very high standard water. You know, we're getting away from that.

[BURGESS] I disagree about that. Every one of those needs to be completely investigated, whether it's the EPA or state agencies that do that, or the drillers themselves, it has to be done in a transparent -- the public has a right to know.

[ASSURAS] Finding out what the problem is is one thing. Acting immediately when there are concerns about people's health, safety is another thing.

[HOLT] Just as we saw in the Gulf drilling, counting on the companies to police themselves -- even the whole industry to police itself -- isn't good enough. You know, a lot of the oil industry was saying, "BP, you know, clean up your act here, BP." But they didn't have any real authority to do it. There is a place for government regulation here. And I'm not saying that either one is right by itself, but we've got to have it, and we've got to have it soon, because this industry is exploding.

[BURGESS] Less than six months after the BP well was controlled, you have the large companies in the Gulf -- Exxon, Conoco, Chevron -- who have now instituted the rapid response --

[HOLT] Yeah, now. That's not a very strong argument, Michael.

[BURGESS] No, they have changed as conditions changed.

[HOLT] No, as the public exposure changed.

[BURGESS] When the president recommended an increase in deepwater drilling, this problem had never occurred before. None of us knew about problems with cementing and casing. We all became junior petroleum engineers in a very short period of time.

[HOLT] Much of that was known; it just wasn't enforced.

[BURGESS] But look how quickly industry has responded. Where is your Department of Interior? Where is the Department of Interior with assuring that this will not happen again?

[HOLT] I've written to the secretary.

[BURGESS] Great. Stack of letters.

[HOLT] There should be air standards.

[BURGESS] We can push those letters down the hole the next time.

[ASSURAS] One last question -- you both say that there is significant concern here; there are problems. Is there a possibility of political compromise in this?

[BURGESS] Absolutely. Again, it's the public does not have the satisfaction that their safety is being protected. It is incumbent upon the drillers, if they want to develop the product, they have a role to play.

[ASSURAS] Drillers and government?

[BURGESS] Of course, government has a role to play. I would argue that...

[HOLT] You better call it, Thalia, while we're this close.

[BURGESS] The state agencies are much more agile, and the geology is different in my area than his area, so why should the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the Railroad Commission, not be the primary ones who are regulating this activity in my state? Remember, my state used to be its own country.

[HOLT] That's one of the points -- you know, in the United States, there is so much mobility from state to state. It has been the standard --

[BURGESS] But the geology is not that mobile.

[HOLT] That in the United States, clean air, clean water, and unpolluted land should be the norm in every state and there should be standards across the country to see that that is the case.

[ASSURAS] And we will be watching the debate between you and others in Congress.

[BURGESS] But the geology is different in Texas, Colorado, and Pennsylvania, vastly different...

[HOLT] But the standards shouldn't be.

[BURGESS] The states should have the primary responsibility for seeing those standards are enforced.

[ASSURAS] And we'll be watching that debate. Gentlemen, thanks to both of you for joining us.