Gasland, screened on HBO this summer and making the rounds at festivals and in small screenings, shines a very bright spotlight on a government-abetted boom in natural gas drilling—and its dire environmental consequences. That boom is being led by a technique called hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," in which chemical-laden water is pressure-pumped deep underground to free up hidden pockets of gas.
Fox's point? A new Wild West of natural gas drilling—far from the promised panacea for our energy problems—is actually a sinister threat to our streams and water supplies.
The idea came after an energy company offered a princely sum of cash to lease his family's land for a well. Fox figured there was a catch, and wound up embarking on a month-long cross-country roadtrip. He interviewed dozens of people living in the shadow of gas wells—some who could torch their tap water!—and came out with a pretty damning film.
It's so damning (stock prices fell briefly for some of the firms in the film), that the energy industry got a PR team to craft a point-by-point rebuttal on a glossy Web site. Of course, Fox has his own rebuttal to the rebuttal. But the images in the film really do speak for themselves.
I was particularly interested in asking Fox about the industry's response, what it was like making the movie, and what kinds of action he thinks we need to take next. The questions and answers come after the jump.
MERCURY: How long did it take you to learn about hydraulic fracturing?
JOSH FOX: All in all it was a two year process, and I continue to learn about it. it wasn't something that I could find a lot about on the Internet. One of the reasons I made the film was that it seemed like this was a huge story that seemed underreported.
What else have you learned, since making the movie, and what still stands out as the most surprising or disturbing thing that you've uncovered?
There are two things that are really disturbing. One is the fact that this was really sanctioned by the government—and it was a process that was so dangerous and it was known to be harmful—and all the basic environmental protections were set aside very intentionally to allow this process to occur. After 2005 when the industry becomes exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act, you see the process explode all over the place.
That this could happen in the United states in 2010 is amazing to me, that people could be completely run over in their own towns by this industry, lose their homes and have their health threatened.
The second thing that's the most disturbing is the industry's response. Despite thousands of cases across the country, the industry continues to maintain they have done nothing wrong, even when they're faced so clearly with cases that are impossible to argue against. They're saying, "well, sue us. We have 400 lawyers; you have none."
I noticed that a lot of the effort to debunk the film, instead of going only after your work, also attacks your background. It seemed as if the words "avant-garde" came up again and again, as if to direct attention from the substance of what you were were reporting on.
I'm a theater director. My work in the theater has had a lot of praise. It's my job. But it's not factually relevant to the story or the film. [That kind of attack] is supposed to play to people who hate the avant-garde. It's really bizarre.
But when it comes to facts, they don't actually dispute some of the things you've reported. You show several examples of tainted water supplies, and they argue only against two.
"I'm happy you're saying that. This stuff is designed to have one spin cycle in the media. Nobody researches it. They just say, "oh, there's a dispute." This report makes it look like there's facts in dispute when there aren't.
How did you gather your subjects? How did you meet them? Were you introduced?
The entire road trip took a month. It was, like, you'd hear about one thing and then all the sudden you'd call someone and people were so starved for attention, out west especially, that by the end of the day, you'd have seven or eight interviews lined up. There were so many people who had complaints. We had countless willing subjects and we still do. We're in the process of making a followup, Gasland 2.
I wanted to make the film as comprehensive as I could. A lot of the things the industry says is that this won't happen in Pennsylvania the way it happened in Texas, or it won't happen in Wyoming the way it happened in Colorado. But in fact you hear the same problems everywhere you go: water contamination, air pollution, health problems, the sense of being completely betrayed, and losing control of your own land.
I was struck by the images of the regulators and the bureaucrats who didn't want to go on camera, and the scenes of you calling up companies to talk to someone in person. Since then, has anyone in the industry tried to reach you personally? Have you had more contact with regulators?
As far as the upper echelons of the gas industry? No. They refuse to talk. They refuse to debate me. The Huffington Post was organizing a video debate and they wanted to get T. Boone Pickens to debate me, and he said no. They couldn't get any major gas company executives to debate me. We continue to call for interviews and they say no.
On the lawmaking side, there are people who are very active in this. I've had a lot of congressional meetings. John Hanger himself [Pennsylvania's top environmental regulator], mandated there should be a water line in Dimock [in Pennsylvania, the first contaminated town where Fox takes us] to replace the water that was poisoned.
As far as the industry goes, though, it's been a stonewall. That's the take from some of the families, too.
What should we be doing about this—even people whose water supplies might not be directly threatened?
The first thing I'd be worried about in Oregon is that there is leasing going on i Southern Oregon. I'd be on lookout for gas companies trying to sell the same bill of goods they sold everywhere else. People should be out in front of this and know that the process is contaminated.
The second thing is to send a letter to your representatives [referring to a bill in Congress that would restore safety limits on hydraulic fracturing]. That bill needs support and sponsorship, especially from states that don't have this crisis going on. Also, just realize that natural gas is not clean. It's not a clean fuel, and we need to move as fast as we can to move toward renewable energy.
