Josh Fox (2015)

Yeah, That's complete nonsense. It is very typical of the kind of craziness that the gas industry likes to put out to create doubt. I have created two short pieces to address these issues, you can find them here: and here: https://vimeo.com/69627896

Additionally, the Lipsky case (the flaming hose) has been documented as the fault of the drilling and fracking in his area over and over and over again: http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/local/investigates/2014/08/19/14067180/
here: http://desmogblog.com/2013/11/06/steve-lipsky-s-flaming-tapwater-no-joke

http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/article3840709.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA0Kfh8GB2c

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2014/06/steve_lipsky_flaming_methane_water.php

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/11/08/2913651/steve-lipsky-range-resources/

Number one; there's no such thing as an unbiased view. It's just not possible. HOWEVER, there is such a thing as truth. Scientific truth. There are currently 480 some-odd peer-reviewed scientific studies that prove every aspect of the Garland movies. Fracknation is an utter lie, designed specifically to create doubt in the science.

We have an obligation to report the truth. And in this case, the truth of fracking is that it's really really bad. So you can't decide - there's a difference between making a report of a true inquisition, and finding it to be a disaster, than deciding ahead of time what your position was going to be. Fracknation is promoted by the fossil fuel industry. They knew exactly what they were doing. I was going out trying to find if I took that $100,000, and what it would do, and what I found was a total disaster.

Number two: I would resist the idea that environmental campaigners on fracking are coming from the suburbs and going to rural areas. That is just simply not true. The fracking movement is coming from the most unexpected places. It's coming from rural America. It's coming from Rural Colorado, Texas, Wyoming... these are not your typical places for an environmental movement. In fact, there is very little fracking resistance in suburbs or major cities. If you look at the polls in New York, for example, it's all being driven by people upstate. People in the city basically are 50/50 on fracking, people in suburbs are pro-fracking on ballots and it's the people upstate that are really where the fracking movement was born. So I don't agree about either of those points.

I don't think Gasland is successful because it's sensationalistic. I think it's successful because it represents millions of people across America who are suffering the same problems.

We were on HBO, but we didn't play in the major cities in theaters. We've played in rural America, across the country and Europe. We've done 350 tour dates, in places like Normal, Illinois. Or Ithaca. Or Buffalo. Or Williamsport, Pennsylvania.

The fracking movement is not urban or suburban. It's predominantly been a movement by people who own land.

Well, what we're seeing right now - on balance- fossil fuel resource extraction areas are economically poorer and have higher unemployment rates. If anything, this is a boom and bust cycle, and when that cycle busts, it busts really hard, because now you have an environmentally destroyed area with no jobs. As you're seeing now, Pennsylvania was the second-to-last state in job creation at the height of the fracking boom. So it's just a lie. When we're talking about jobs, we have to talk about the comparison between fracking jobs and all the other jobs that exist. because when you bring fracking into an area, all the tourism jobs go away. A LOT of the agriculture jobs are going to go away, because they are not sustainable - you're living in a toxic zone. Also, you're destroying the renewable energy economy. Renewable energy provides vastly more jobs than fracking.

The Brookings Institute forecasts 4 million new jobs in solar. You're never going to get 4 million jobs in fracking.

So when you go for renewable energy, you create far more wealth and communities. If you invest $1 million in oil and gas, you get 3.8 jobs. If you invest $1 million in wind and sun, you get 9.5 and 9.8 jobs, respectively.

Additionally, the death rate in the fracking industry is 7 times the national average. So you don't want these jobs, and you don't want these jobs in your community. So you're actually taking value out of your community. That's what extractive industries do. They extract the value and leave behind a toxic mess. Renewable energy development actually creates value in a community. A house with solar on the roof is worth more than a house without it. A community with sustainable values and a clean environment is also economically much more valuable and viable than a toxic gas field.

Again, that is completely untrue. See my short film on the subject here:

Governor Cuomo determined in the end that the sky is blue! Thank you Governor Cuomo!!!

Well, right now, about 90% of all the oil & gas wells in America are fracked - so I'm assuming you mean ways other than fracking.

So right now, the answer is for the most part, no. But it's the wrong question to ask. We should be asking how do we get off of natural gas altogether?

And that's a very easy answer.

The wind and the sun.

We can do everything that we use fossil fuels for, including gas, by going renewable. From every standpoint, going renewable is what we HAVE to do - whether we're looking at water contamination, air pollution, regional health impacts, earthquakes, radioactivity, or the big one, which is climate change, if we're looking at all this from every angle, we have to move towards renewable energy.

So what fracking represents is not some new way to get natural gas out of the ground - it represents a huge new push in fossil fuel dependency.

And so fracking must be defeated if we're going to get anywhere near our reasonable targets for climate change.

Actually they are sufficient. We can power the world on 100 percent renewable energy- no nuclear. And those are peer-reviewed scientific results. See the great illustrations of our capability here: and then ACT on that science by going renewable here: Thanks for the question!

I have stated this over and over again because it is true. My father was approached by NWPOA and was offered the same lease as all the folks in NWPOA got. That was the offer. I sent over 60 emails from NWPOA to my family that prove that my father was a member of the NWPOA to the Colorado Public Radio station that challenged the facts and those are posted at their website. My father was offered the same lease. He withdrew from the leasing pool once it was discovered that fracking was extremely harmful to the environment and would destroy his property value. Additionally, the NWPOA was working directly for the gas companies involved, which is a totally legit way to represent the offer made to my family.

Once again, it is the frackers that refuse to acknowledge reality here. This is the gas industry saying over and over again that the sky is pink. But the truth is otherwise, for more go here:

I think other states should. I think people don't think realize that Vermont has also banned fracking. I think you have seen a huge citizen uprising against every place where it's taken place. We have a huge movement in California, Colorado, New Mexico. We're also seeing a lot of local bans that are very powerful. Pittsburgh has banned fracking. There are several valid initiatives to ban fracking in cities in Colorado which have all won. Where the democracy is responsive to the people you have a ban. Where you see the government respond to the people - you have a ban. Unfortunately, right now, you have a huge push from the oil industry against it.

The short answer: Yes. California is suffering the worst drought in decades. Why? Climate change. Fracking will only make that worse. We need to move beyond fossil fuels. Period.
http://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/nasa-california-down-to-one-year-supply-of-water-414093379755

Also, California is suffering other horrible impacts of fracking- whole aquifers in CA were contaminated by fracking waste. Take a look:
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/fracking-10-06-2014.html
http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/10/07/central-california-aquifers-contaminated-billions-gallons-fracking-wastewater
http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/State-let-oil-companies-taint-drinkable-water-in-6054242.php

That's absolutely not true, and absolutely not what I said. The video that you are referencing is severely edited- it was a 20 min answer that was completely rearranged to make it look like I said what I did not. Ask for the full video to be released and you will see. But I have provided you with a website with dozens of references and a short film that will provide you with all the scientific proof that anyone will ever need on the link between drilling/fracking and flammable water. here it is again:

There are also over 450 peer reviewed papers that overwhelmingly support the evidence and reporting in GASLAND. Here they are for your reference:
http://www.psehealthyenergy.org/site/view/1180

And here are several articles that also provide the facts about those who are smearing GASLAND:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/03/01/_they_re_the_birthers_of_fracking_a_conversation_with_josh_fox.html

http://truth-out.org/news/item/16757-exposed-fracknation-deploys-tobacco-playbook-in-response-to-gasland-2

http://truth-out.org/news/item/16803-fracknation-the-koch-industries-ties-that-bind

Additionally the Q and A sequence in the film with Josh Fox was deliberately edited to mis-represent Mr. Fox's statements. Mr. McAleer has persistently harassed Josh Fox and represented his statements in a false light, he has a long history of baiting environmentalists, denying climate change and spreading misinformation.

This kind of deliberate misrepresentation through editing is the hallmark of the Breitbart/O'Keefe school of smear. They've been caught flat out lying and employing these kinds of tactics over and over and over again. Don't fall for them. It's a total scam.

More references:
http://mediamatters.org/research/2010/07/22/timeline-of-breitbarts-sherrod-smear/168090

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/22/inside-a-hollywood-hit-job-how-james-o-keefe-tried-and-tried-to-sting-his-latest-victim.html

http://www.alternet.org/environment/gaslands-josh-fox-stings-back-james-okeefes-deceptive-film

http://www.salon.com/2014/05/22/james_okeefes_anti_fracking_scam_backfires/

http://ecowatch.com/2014/05/25/gasland-josh-fox-james-okeefe-entrapment/

Was not faked in any way. I have addressed this question many times, because it is a frequent attack that comes from the fossil fuel industry. At this website there is an 18 minute film and dozens of references that proves the relationship between flaming water and tracking/drilling. Here you go:

(And yes, the industry trolls are always out full force whenever something like this goes down...) Thanks for the question.

Act 13 did several things: It attempted to overturn fracking bans in Pennsylvania, so it was a threat to Pittsburgh and other cities that banned fracking. The part of Act 13 that threatened these cities was overturned by the Supreme court in PA, because it was unconstitutional.

The PA constitution states that people have an unalienable right to clean air, clean water, and a clean environment.

So Act 13, which was a totally illegal piece of legislation created by the oil and gas industry, was actually overturned by the state of PA.

It also made it illegal for doctors to tell their patients if they were poisoned by gas wells.

This was also challenged in court, but I don't know the outcome of that.

First of all, America is in disastrous economic shape for so many people.

And the natural gas industry exploits that problem.

We have suffered economic injustice that is insane in America, right now. We're talking about a country where the richest less than 1% owns more than the bottom 50%. And a lot of that inequality is evidenced by these major corporations, and the banks and oil & gas industry are some of the worst offenders.

When we're talking about distributed generations of power - wind, sun, renewable energy - we're talking about forms of energy that are far more equitable in terms of people making money off of them. When you take your $100,000, what you've essentially done is destroyed the value in your property.

And you've also probably destroyed of your neighbor's property as well.

So you can't expect to keep living where you're living if you take that money. Because you're now living in a toxic situation.

So the money comes out to be worse off, and in many cases, you have incredible regret that people ever saw the Natural Gas industry walk into their yard, even if they made money. But beyond that, we have to figure out ways to address the basic economic inequality problems in America.

And one of the ways to do that is to talk about how renewable energy could be a major economic driver throughout all of America.

I love this question! First of all, I think you if you're a young person hold two things in your mind: 1) no one can make the movie you want to make, 2) no time has it been easier to make a movie than now.

The camera on your cellphone is probably higher resolution than the cameras I used to make Gasland.

That said, the movie has to matter than more people than just you. So you have to find the thing that matters more to you than anything else in world AND matters to a lot of other people too.

You wouldn't walk in to the Boston Philharmonic and ask to be the first chair violin on the first day, similarly with film-making, you have to continue to work at your craft and work your ass off, and learn to keep your audience close to you all the time - when you've made 5 minutes of your movie, show people and learn what works and what doesn't work with your movie.

The other piece of advice, keep your audience close to you all the time. When you made five minutes of your movie - show it to people right away. Learn what works and what doesn't work with your movie. when we made Gasland in 10 minute increments, we constantly showed people, and it helped us learn what was working and what wasn't working.

Yes, I've made one previous feature film, but I directed theater for 20 years - I made plays and traveled across the world.

The budget? Well, the first movie cost practically nothing - the total shooting budget was I think under $3000 or $4000. That's some that's someone can do over the course of a year. It was really cheap, but I did work with a nonprofit theater company so we did get some donations from people who believed in the film.

We submitted it to Sundance, and they gave us a 20k grant to finish the sound mix, and then they accepted our film in to the festival (which was a huge long shot).

The film was originally just meant for our community, we never knew how successful it would be so we never went around raising money for it. I was sleeping on friend's couches, sleeping in my car, just trying to make a movie.

I was extremely lucky to get my editor and co-camera man Matthew Sanchez to team up with me and work for a year, for free. He's amazing, a total genius.

Our producer, Molly Gandour had just left a job at PBS and had 3 months of unemployment under her belt, so she also helped us with the project.

And I was lucky enough to meet our producer, Trish Adlesic, at a Gasland screening - she joined the team because she really cared about the project. That was pretty much the whole team, just 4 people!

We also received support from the activist community... people came out of the woodwork to help with this project.

You have to understand, when the gas industry creates millions of gallons of toxic waste around communities, you have to do your part to help fight that - Gasland was my contribution to this.

If the water contamination issues, the air pollution issues, the health issues, or the fragmentation of our democracy don't move you and the earthquakes fail to shake you out of your chair, I still think, as the younger generation, we have to appeal on the level of climate change.

Your dad's generation, as unmovable as they sometimes are, has known that climate is changing.

It is our responsibility (including them) to leave the next generation a planet that won't be a complete nightmare.

Put it to him this way: if he was going to leave you his house, he wouldn't go to the basement and knock the supports down with a hammer or leave the car running in the garage (and fill your house with toxic fumes). He wouldn't poison your tap water. He wouldn't make the home that he's leaving to you inhospitable and that's what our climate is doing to the world.

I think you have to look at this issue from the prospective of this: what will happen to the next generation after hes gone, and how important is it to him to leave you a world worth living in?

...what's your mom think?

Well, at Columbia i was a theater student. I studied a lot of Shakespeare ...I think that always helps, but drama is essentially always about the social ills of its time.

When you're in drama, you're in a political context. There's no great play ever written that wasn't explicitly about the politics of that time (Death of a Salesman, Macbeth, etc).

That being said, i never really set out to start a movement, I wanted to save my town. All politics is local.

If i was at Columbia now, I would start anti-fracking groups on campus. The group would encourage Columbia to divest from fossil fuels. It is incredibly hypocritical for institutions of higher learning to be invested in the very thing that will deprive their students of a future. That makes no sense- to be preparing people for a future while simultaneously destroying it.

We have actually just completed a film on Divestment- you can request a screening by signing up at

I think this may help you. One of my favorite teachers at Columbia, Ann Bogart, told me: if you want to get anything done, talk to the person next to you at dinner.

One day she was a dinner and a guy next to her started talking to her and went on and on about a film that he wanted to make. She said, "good for you, I have nothing to do with film, but good luck."

Years later she found out that the film (The Red Violin) was made. And she was convinced that it happened because eventually he kept talking to a lot of people and kept talking until he found the right person and they made the film.

So, if you're passionate about something, always talk to the person next to you at lunch, at breakfast, at the bar. It is about them. It is who you are close to. It is who you are lying next to in bed.

This also helps make the issue closer to you. We usually think of saving the earth as this big far away thing, but its not, its as close to you as the person lying next to you in bed, as the person sitting with you at dinner.

The Bill Maher Show was one of my favorite things that's ever happened to me because everyone on the panel was after me (except for Bill), and I had fun despite how combative it was. It was obvious that they were going off the industry talking points, which are all false and easily defeated.

But it's terrifying going on a program like that, even though you know that the people you're debating against are less knowledgeable than you and you know they will use the most specious arguments to try to attack you. Its a huge challenge to try to keep your cool and try to be rational and calm instead of reaching across the table and strangling someone. I was happy with the way it turned out.

I didn't really get to meet Bill Maher, by the time you get to your part in the show, Bill is already on air. After the show tapes, there's a little party and I got to say hi to him at a little post-show reception. He seemed like a nice guy. What was more interesting is that I actually think I moved the panel a bit. I got some of them to admit that they didn't know what they were talking about...of course that was once we were already off the air.

I really enjoyed his production staff (who all happened to support Gasland). They were incredibly well prepared.

Oh my god! What's my favorite cheese? I'm a lover of all cheese, I have so many things to say about cheese.

In France (where they banned fracking), they have amazing cheese. They actually named a street after me there. Also, 20,000 wine makers marched in the streets...and you know, you can't have wine without cheese.

In California, there's a dairy farm Fiscalini makes the best cheese, and the whole farm runs off renewable energy.

Cheese production and renewable energy go really well together because you can have solar panels over where your cows graze and the grass still grows. Then, in some locations, you can sell the energy to your neighbors.

Upstate where i live, dairy production is in trouble. Milk is selling at a very low price per gallon. So selling renewable energy can help.

But to answer your question, any cheese that is very stinky and very gooey. I like cheeses that are very strong and...sensual.

I'm Italian, so cheese is in my veins.

Haha! That was my question several years ago.
so i created two projects - and

Solutions projects details all of the science behind how we can get to renewable energy. Grass roots is about organizing your community to get off of fossil fuels.

So, lets say you have an electric car and you have solar panels on your roof - no offense, but whoop-dee-doo, you're a great person -
Now get the rest of your neighborhood to start contributing too!

Grass roots is meant to encourage entire communities to go rogue from fossil fuels. We're currently hoping to expand this in to a national program.

However this is a democracy problem, not just an energy problem.
So we need to solve this the way we would other political problems - engage with our neighbors, engage with our communities, and start making changes.

So, to recap: you can find activist groups at solutionsgrassroots.com and Gasland's website

PGH was the first city to ban fracking in the entire world! And Troy Polamalu was the ONLY major sports figure to tweet about GASLAND (and recommend it!) Yinz know what your talking about n'at.

Go Stillers!

Never count out a determined movement. They said we would never win in New York. We did. They said we would never win in the Delaware River basin. We did. We will keep on winning. There is a long long long list of places that have banned fracking including much of Europe, many places in CO and NM. Maryland just won a 2 year moratorium. We are on the move!

There's really no way to improve fracking. The only way to handle this question is to go to renewable energy.

If you watch Gasland 2, you'll see the industry actually admits that a huge amount of their gas wells leak. 5% will start to leak immediately upon drilling. 50% start to leak after 30 years. Their own documents detailed the exact rates of failures of their past wells.

Now, if you're dependent on that aquifer, then you have to keep that resource clean. Because once it is polluted it's pretty much polluted forever.

But the real issue is, we have to be moving off fossil fuels period. To start to use new fossil fuels such as shale gas is the opposite of what we should be doing.

Fantastic! Thank you!

First of all, I would challenge that we weren't successful - I am flabbergasted by how much success we've had.

The anti-fracking moment is one of the most successful and fastest growing environmental movements in history.

We've seen frackers pull out of countries like Bulgaria and South Africa. We've seen bans or moratoriums in places like Maryland, New York, Germany, France.

To get more information, i would suggest people sign up for alerts on gaslandmovie.com.

We win victories in the fracking battle all the time, but to be completely honest: yes, the corporations are that powerful. We're at a time of unprecedented corporate power and greed. These corporations have dominated the political conversation for a long time, but that doesn't mean that we can't win, as the fracking movement has proved true grass roots movements like those in NY/MD/Germany/France are what have had real, significant victories.

These are not just symbolic victories - the ban in the Delaware river basin provided millions of people with clean water.

The New York fracking ban does the environmental equivalent of taking million cars off the road and 60 coal power plants off for a year. That said, we still have a long long way to go.

Our current system is not sustainable - it ravages it depletes, it destroys, and it harms a lot of people, but i have a lot of faith in the world of renewable energy and the world of activism

Simply being involved changes your quality of life, and I would encourage anyone to get involved even in the most hopeless of battles because it makes your day seem complete.

It's also available for free on Docurama!