One of the biggest problems of the whole fracking thing is the economical one. Romania doesn't actually have a lot to win and most of the gain is taken by Chevron. As in the Rosia Montana case, if Romania would be the one actually exploiting her lands, it would all be understandable and the action would help the Romanian economy. Secondly, one of their arguments is that they are offering to the Pungesti residents jobs, once the fracking begins. Well, they would get some jobs for a few years, but poor paid, as the experts that would really get the best paid jobs would be sent by Chevron and, as they are paying the production costs, Romania would only have very little to gain, just like in the 'good' old communist years, when USSR had SevRom in Romania - although Romania was paying everything, the production costs and the wages, the expert were sent from Russia and all the profit went to Moscow. Thirdly, just like in the case of Rosia Montana, the environment would get destroyed, and it's not only about the fact that the trees won't be so green anymore - people are living there and have a history, families, their own houses and lands, a whole social system that must be respected. Just destroying a community for the sake of Chevron gaining something and Romania still be in the same economical situation is more than wrong. And finally, the most important aspect of the fracking is that the actual residents of Pungesti do not agree with it. They protested against it several times, and this is a powerful enough reason for Chevron to stop the fracking, as it doesn't help develop a community that is against it.