Hubbry Logo
GaslandGaslandMain
Open search
Gasland
Community hub
Gasland
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Gasland
Gasland
Gasland
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Gasland
Directed byJosh Fox
Written byJosh Fox
Produced byTrish Adlesic
Josh Fox
Molly Gandour
Narrated byJosh Fox
CinematographyJosh Fox
Edited byMatthew Sanchez
Production
company
International WOW Company
Distributed byHBO
Release date
  • January 24, 2010 (2010-01-24) (Sundance)
Running time
104 minutes
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish

Gasland is a 2010 American documentary film written and directed by Josh Fox. It focuses on communities in the United States where natural gas drilling activity was a concern and, specifically, on hydraulic fracturing ("fracking"), a method of stimulating production in otherwise impermeable rock. The film was a key mobilizer for the anti-fracking movement,[1] and "brought the term 'hydraulic fracturing' into the nation's living rooms" according to The New York Times.[2]

Fracking is a technique that has been used routinely since the late 1940s as an aid to stimulating production in oil and gas wells.[3] Horizontal drilling, a recent innovation in drilling techniques, can create horizontal pathways deep within the Earth, and has successfully incorporated hydraulic fracturing to release fluids from shale formations. Horizontal drilling coupled with fracking has transformed the energy business, enabled vast new supplies of natural gas, and advanced the goal of United States energy independence.

The film premiered at the 2010 Sundance Film Festival, where it was awarded the Special Jury Prize for Documentary. In June 2010, it premiered on HBO to an audience of 3 million homes, and it was seen by over 250,000 audience members during a 250-city grassroots tour. Among its numerous nominations and awards, the film was nominated for Best Documentary Feature at the 83rd Academy Awards[2][4] and won Outstanding Directing for Nonfiction Programming at the 63rd Primetime Emmy Awards.

Synopsis

[edit]
John Fenton, a farmer and rancher from Pavillion, Wyoming, became an internationally recognized anti-hydraulic fracturing activist following his appearance in Gasland. He is pictured here at a public event in Sheridan, Wyoming, on September 15, 2012. [5]

Josh Fox describes his receipt of a letter in May 2008 from a gas company, offering a signing bonus of nearly $100,000 to lease his family's land in Milanville, Pennsylvania, to drill for natural gas,[6] after which he sets out to see how communities across the nation are being affected by the natural gas drilling boom. Beginning in nearby Dimock before driving to locations as far away as Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, and Texas, where the boom began a decade earlier, he spends time with citizens in their homes and on their land and hears stories about how hydraulic fracturing has contaminated their air, water wells, and surface water with methane and toxic chemicals, leading to a variety of chronic health problems and, sometimes, tap water that can be lit on fire. Although some residents have obtained court injunctions or settlement money from gas companies to replace the affected water supplies with potable water or water purification kits, the companies continue to insist that fracking has never been proven to be the cause of any contamination.[7] Fox is particularly troubled by what he learns because there are plans to begin drilling for natural gas in the portion of the Marcellus Shale formation that overlaps with the New York City Watershed and the Delaware River Basin, which together provide unfiltered drinking water to 15.6 million people in New York City, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. Scientists, government employees, and politicians describe how the Energy Policy Act of 2005 exempted hydraulic fracturing from the Safe Drinking Water Act,[8] making the practice essentially unregulated, and, in the end, Fox finds himself in the halls of Congress as a subcommittee discusses the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act, "a bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to repeal a certain exemption for hydraulic fracturing"[9] (the proposal never made it past the committee stage).

Production

[edit]
Josh Fox plays his banjo at a jam session following an environmental meeting at which he was the featured speaker in Sheridan, Wyoming, on November 5, 2011.

Gasland was Fox's first documentary and second film, following Memorial Day, a narrative feature from 2008. He made the film over the course of about eighteen months and often worked as a one-man crew while filming, though later in the process he sometimes employed additional camera operators.[10] Fox gave editor Matthew Sanchez credit for coming up with the structure of the film and said they edited roughly 200 hours of footage down to approximately 100 minutes.[11]

Debra Winger is credited as a "creative consultant" on the film.

Reception

[edit]

Positive

[edit]

On review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 98% based on 41 reviews, with an average score of 7/10; the website's "critics consensus" reads: "GasLand patiently and powerfully outlines alarming problems with modern fuel extraction -- and the horrific public health risks that go along with them."[12]

Robert Koehler of Variety referred to the film as "one of the most effective and expressive environmental films of recent years", saying it "may become to the dangers of natural gas drilling what Silent Spring was to DDT."[13]

Eric Kohn of IndieWire wrote: "Gasland is the paragon of first person activist filmmaking done right. […] By grounding a massive environmental issue in its personal ramifications, Fox turns Gasland into a remarkably urgent diary of national concerns."[14]

A review in the Denton Record Chronicle said that "Fox decides that his own backyard in Pennsylvania isn’t his exclusive property. […] Set to his own banjo music and clever footage, Gasland is both sad and scary." The review concluded with the statement: "if your soul isn’t moved by the documentary, yours is a heart of shale."[15]

Stewart Nusbaumer of the Huffington Post said the film "just might take you from outrage right into the fire of action."[16]

Bloomberg News critic Dave Shiflett wrote that Fox "may go down in history as the Paul Revere of fracking."[17]

Chicago TimeOut gave Gasland four out of five stars.[18]

In Australia, film critic Julie Riggs called the documentary a "horror movie, and a wake-up call."[19][20]

Mark Kermode of BBC Radio 5 Live gave the film a generally positive review, criticizing its similarity to other recent oil documentaries, yet praising its "extraordinary visual kick". He said "it is a very interesting story which is made better by the fact that the visuals of it are very poetic, very lyrical", and felt that its themes and ideas were relevant and well presented.

Fort Worth Business Press writer John-Laurent Tronche talked about the growing number of documentaries "that aim to shed a light on what they call a dirty, destructive practice: shale gas exploration. And although oil and gas supporters have labeled the motion pictures as radical propaganda, a local drilling activist said they’re part of a larger, critical look into an ever-growing industry."[21]

Negative

[edit]

Energy in Depth (EiD), launched by the Independent Petroleum Association of America,[22] created a web page with a list of factual inaccuracies in the documentary,[23] and produced an associated film titled TruthLand.[24] In response to the EID's criticisms of the film, the makers of Gasland offered a rebuttal.[25]

In an article for Forbes magazine, Dr. Michael Economides, a professor of engineering at the University of Houston and former consultant for energy companies including Chevron, Shell, and Petrobras,[26] commented on the "scene from the upcoming documentary Gasland, which features a man lighting his faucet water on fire and making the ridiculous claim that natural gas drilling is responsible for the incident. The clip, though attention-getting, is wildly inaccurate and irresponsible. To begin with, the vertical depth separation between drinking water aquifers and reservoir targets for gas production is several thousand feet of impermeable rock. Any interchange between the two, if it were possible, would have happened already in geologic time, measured in tens of millions of years, not in recent history."[27] Subsequent academic studies have proven that the area in which the scene takes place (Weld, Colorado) hydraulic fracturing - particularly due to leaking/damaged bores - had contaminated groundwater.

In an article for Movies on Chatham, Dr. Pam Hassebroek, a former petroleum reservoir engineer (Registered Professional Engineer) at both Exxon Research and Shell, pointed out the long history of oil seeps in surface areas, saying that, in Pennsylvania and New York, surface oil has been documented since at least as far back as the 18th century. She also mentioned that U.S. oil and gas production has benefited from the use of hydraulic fracturing since the 1940s.[28]

A documentary rebutting Gasland's claims, FrackNation, was successfully funded on Kickstarter and released in 2013.

Awards

[edit]

Won

Nominated

Sequel

[edit]

A sequel to Gasland titled Gasland Part II premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival in New York City on April 21, 2013,[29][30][31][32] and was broadcast on HBO on July 8. It won Best Documentary at both the Environmental Media Awards and the Wild and Scenic Film Festival, and was given the "Hell Yeah Prize" at the Cinema Eye Honors.

How to Let Go of the World and Love All the Things Climate Can't Change, the third part of the Gasland trilogy, premiered at the 2016 Sundance Film Festival, toured the world theatrically, and was broadcast on HBO in June. Like Gasland and Gasland Part II, it also won Best Documentary at the Environmental Media Awards.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Gasland

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
is a American written and directed by Josh Fox, which investigates the environmental and consequences of hydraulic fracturing, a technique used to extract from formations. The film chronicles Fox's journey across states like and , interviewing residents who report contaminated , flammable , and illnesses allegedly linked to nearby operations. It portrays hydraulic fracturing as a process that injects vast quantities of water, sand, and chemicals underground, potentially polluting aquifers and ecosystems. Premiering at the , Gasland garnered significant attention, earning an Academy Award nomination for Best Documentary Feature and contributing to public discourse on energy extraction regulations. However, the documentary has been widely criticized for factual inaccuracies and misleading presentations, including iconic scenes of ignited household water that predate activities and stem from natural migrations rather than drilling fluids. Independent analyses and government investigations, such as those by the U.S. Geological Survey, have refuted claims of systematic groundwater contamination from hydraulic fracturing, attributing many depicted issues to unrelated geological factors or poor well construction predating modern practices. Fox's selective omission of regulatory safeguards and industry responses further fueled debates over the film's balance, with pro-energy sources documenting over a dozen major errors that exaggerated risks to advance an anti- narrative. Despite sequels reinforcing similar themes, empirical data from peer-reviewed studies and federal assessments indicate hydraulic fracturing poses manageable risks when properly regulated, contrasting Gasland's alarmist depictions.

Production and Development

Origins and Motivation

In 2008, Josh Fox, a New York-based theater director and independent filmmaker, received a mailing from a natural gas company offering $100,000 to lease his family's 19-acre property in Milanville, Pennsylvania, located in the upper Delaware River Basin, for hydraulic fracturing (fracking) operations. This offer, amid a shale gas boom driven by advances in horizontal drilling and fracking techniques, raised concerns for Fox about potential risks to local water supplies, air quality, and public health, motivating him to reject the deal and begin documenting the broader implications. Fox's inquiry started as a personal effort to assess whether posed genuine threats to his family's land and the surrounding watershed, which supplies drinking water to over 15 million people downstream in and . Drawing on his background in experiential theater and , he traveled across 24 states over 18 months, interviewing residents, landowners, and experts who reported issues such as flammable , illnesses, and habitat disruption near drilling sites. This investigation, self-funded initially through Fox's savings and small grants, transformed into the framework for Gasland, framed as an exposé on unregulated energy extraction rather than a balanced . The film's origins reflect Fox's stated commitment to environmental advocacy, influenced by earlier works on topics like global warming, but catalyzed by the direct economic incentive of the offer amid Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale rush, where drilling permits surged from 41 in 2007 to over 3,000 by 2010. While Fox positioned the project as driven by empirical encounters with affected communities, subsequent scrutiny has questioned the veracity of some early anecdotes, including the offer's details, though it undeniably served as the spark for his anti-fracking narrative.

Filmmaking Process

Following the receipt of a leasing offer in May 2008, Josh Fox initiated the production of Gasland by embarking on an investigative road trip across 24 states impacted by natural gas drilling activities. The filmmaking adopted an organic, cinéma vérité approach, capturing Fox's personal journey from Pennsylvania through regions such as Colorado, Wyoming, Texas, and others where hydraulic fracturing operations were underway. Fox operated primarily as a one-man crew, handling directing, producing, writing, and significant portions of the cinematography without a large team, which allowed for flexible, on-the-ground documentation of interviews and demonstrations. This ramshackle process involved iterative filming and editing, enabling real-time incorporation of emerging footage and audience feedback during development. Key sequences featured on-site interviews with affected residents, environmental advocates, and industry representatives, often conducted in homes, fields, and public hearings to illustrate local experiences. Principal photography spanned approximately 18 months, from mid-2008 to late 2009, culminating in the film's completion for its premiere at the on January 22, 2010. Post-production emphasized raw, unpolished visuals to convey urgency, with Fox incorporating musical elements like performances to frame the narrative personally. The low-budget production relied on Fox's theater background with the WOW Company for creative execution, avoiding conventional documentary structures in favor of an exposé-style format.

Funding and Distribution

Gasland was produced on a low budget of $32,078, funded primarily through director Josh Fox's personal resources, including , supplemented by donations from supporters who believed in the project's message. Fox has stated that the film began as a personal investigation prompted by a land leasing offer from a company in May 2008, with initial financing coming from grassroots contributions rather than institutional grants or corporate backing. To complete post-production, including the sound mix, Fox secured a grant from the Sundance Institute's Documentary Film Program, part of a $582,000 disbursement to 29 documentaries announced prior to the festival. This support enabled the film's submission and premiere at the on January 24, , where it received the Special Jury Prize for Documentary. After its festival success, HBO acquired Gasland for broadcast and U.S. distribution, with the network premiering the film on June 21, 2010. The deal provided wide exposure, including multiple airings and availability on the platform, though the film saw limited theatrical release beyond festival screenings. No evidence of significant undisclosed funding from advocacy foundations or other entities has been documented, aligning with the film's independent, shoestring production origins.

Content and Claims

Synopsis

chronicles filmmaker Josh Fox's personal investigation into , or , for extraction, prompted by a $100,000 lease offer from a gas company for his family's property in Pennsylvania's Basin in 2008. Rather than accepting the deal, Fox travels across 24 states over 18 months, interviewing residents in drilling-impacted areas to assess environmental and health risks. The film structures its narrative around Fox's road trip odyssey, blending firsthand accounts, visual demonstrations, and archival footage to portray 's alleged consequences. Central to the documentary are vivid depictions of water contamination, including scenes where residents ignite -laden tap water from kitchen faucets, as shown in Bainbridge Township, Ohio, following nearby drilling. Fox visits Dimock, Pennsylvania, where locals attribute mysterious illnesses, livestock deaths, and foul-smelling, sediment-filled well water to nearby Cabot Oil & Gas operations starting in 2008, with state investigations later confirming elevated levels in some aquifers. In Pavilion, Wyoming, rancher John Fenton describes groundwater degradation after began in the area around 2005, with EPA sampling in 2009-2010 detecting synthetic chemicals consistent with fluids. The film also examines regulatory shortcomings, highlighting the 2005 Energy Policy Act's exemption of from key provisions of the —termed the "Halliburton Loophole"—and features excerpts from 2010 congressional hearings where industry executives assert fracking's safety. Fox contrasts these assurances with resident testimonies of , , and economic coercion through lease pressures, framing promotion as misleading despite its lower carbon emissions compared to . The narrative culminates in calls for transparency on fracking chemicals, which the film claims include 596 undisclosed substances, many hazardous.

Key Assertions on Fracking Risks

Gasland asserts that hydraulic fracturing leads to contamination primarily through migration and leaks from well casings, as depicted in footage of residents igniting tap water from kitchen faucets in areas like Pavilion, , and Dimock, . The film attributes these incidents to proximity of drilling sites, claiming that faulty well construction allows to seep into aquifers. Filmmaker Josh Fox contends that fracking fluids, comprising water mixed with sand and over 596 chemicals—including biocides, corrosion inhibitors, and gelling agents—include proprietary "" additives that are carcinogenic, mutagenic, or neurotoxic, with millions of gallons injected per well potentially fracturing protective rock layers and contaminating supplies. He highlights exemptions under the , which classify fracking fluids as non-hazardous under the , limiting federal oversight and disclosure requirements. The links these risks to impacts, featuring testimonials from residents reporting rashes, respiratory issues, and neurological symptoms, alongside deaths and degradation near drilling sites. argues that incomplete well integrity and surface spills exacerbate risks, asserting that industry assurances of safety ignore from affected communities.

Release and Recognition

Premiere and Awards

Gasland premiered at the 2010 on January 24, 2010, marking its world debut. The documentary received the Special Jury Prize for World Documentary at the festival, recognizing its impact on environmental filmmaking. Following its festival screening, the film aired on on June 21, 2010, broadening its audience reach. In awards recognition, Gasland earned a nomination for Best Documentary Feature at the held in 2011, though it did not win. It secured two Primetime Emmy Awards in 2011: one for Outstanding Cinematography for Nonfiction Programming and another for Outstanding Research in Science and Technology Programming. These accolades highlighted the film's technical and investigative strengths amid debates over its hydraulic fracturing claims.

Initial Critical Reception

Gasland premiered at the 2010 , where it won the Special Jury Prize for , signaling early recognition for its examination of hydraulic fracturing's impacts. Critics at the festival and in subsequent reviews praised the film's personal narrative style and its role in spotlighting underreported environmental concerns related to drilling. For instance, environmental advocates described it as a "gripping" portrayal of industrial production's risks upon its broadcast on June 21, 2010. Aggregate critic scores reflected this enthusiasm, with reporting a 97% approval rating based on 39 reviews and an average score of around 7/10. Reviews highlighted director Josh Fox's investigative journey and vivid depictions of affected communities, such as residents igniting , as effective in raising public awareness, though some noted the film's advocacy tone. British critic commended Fox for adding a "fresh spin" to the story, emphasizing its relevance. While initial film criticism focused on its alarm-raising merits, early pushback emerged from sources questioning the documentary's selective evidence and dramatic presentation, though such responses gained traction more prominently in amid Oscar contention. Overall, the reception underscored Gasland's success in galvanizing discourse on prior to widespread fact-checking efforts.

Controversies and Fact-Checking

Specific Claims and Debunkings

A prominent visual in Gasland shows a homeowner in , igniting from his kitchen faucet, implying causation by hydraulic fracturing. State investigations, however, traced the to natural biogenic sources in shallow aquifers at depths of less than 600 feet, while fracking occurs over 7,000 feet below, with no evidence of migration from deep formations. Similar pre-existing gas seeps have been documented in the region since the 1970s, predating modern unconventional drilling. In Dimock, , Gasland highlighted resident complaints of foul and health issues near Cabot Oil & Gas wells, including a settlement for in supplies. The Department of Environmental Protection's 2012 review found levels elevated due to natural strata or legacy conventional wells, not fluids, with no hydraulic fracturing chemicals detected in domestic supplies; Cabot's provision of alternative addressed dissolved without admitting causation. The film's portrayal of , , groundwater as contaminated by chemicals, featuring resident John Fenton, drew from an EPA draft report in December 2011 suggesting possible links via high-volume fracking. Subsequent U.S. Geological Survey sampling in 2012 detected hydrocarbons but attributed them primarily to surface pit discharges and natural sources rather than deep fracking; Wyoming's 2014 analysis confirmed no definitive hydraulic fracturing fluid markers in aquifers, leading the EPA to terminate its involvement in June 2013 and defer to state regulators, who imposed no fracking-specific remedies. Gasland asserted widespread secrecy in fracking fluid compositions endangering , citing undisclosed "toxic" chemicals. Disclosures under state laws and the 2011 voluntaryFracFocus registry revealed common additives like sand, water, and biocides already used in conventional operations, with EPA assessments finding no verified cases of systemic from these fluids across thousands of wells; peer-reviewed studies, including a 2014 Yale , identified risks mainly from surface spills or well integrity failures, not inherent fracking processes. Claims of induced earthquakes solely from fracking wastewater injection were overstated, as Gasland linked them broadly to ; U.S. Geological Survey data attributes most detectable to injection volumes in specific basins like Oklahoma's, with itself causing only microseisms below human perception, mitigated by regulatory adjustments since 2015.

Scientific and Industry Responses

The oil and industry responded to Gasland with detailed fact-checks, including Energy In Depth's 2010 report "Debunking Gasland," which argued that the film's depictions of flammable faucets and water contamination misrepresented naturally occurring biogenic in shallow aquifers as fracking-induced pollution, citing regulatory investigations that found no causal links to hydraulic fracturing. The similarly critiqued the documentary for lacking journalistic rigor in attributing isolated well issues to fracking without of in well integrity or fluid migration. State regulators, such as the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC), directly addressed Gasland's featured cases in Pavillion, , and wells, concluding after testing that methane levels were biogenic—derived from microbial decomposition rather than anthropogenic sources—and unrelated to nearby drilling operations, with no detection of chemicals. Scientific scrutiny has largely contradicted Gasland's assertions of routine groundwater contamination. Peer-reviewed research, including a 2013 Duke University study in the Fayetteville Shale, Arkansas, analyzed pre- and post-drilling samples and found no discernible impairment in groundwater quality attributable to hydraulic fracturing. A 2017 study in West Virginia's Marcellus Shale reported consistent evidence from three years of comprehensive testing showing no groundwater contamination linked to fracking activities. Additional peer-reviewed work in Ohio's Utica Shale (2018) and near Fort Worth, Texas (2018), confirmed the absence of fracking-related impacts on shallow aquifers, attributing detectable methane to natural geological features rather than operational failures. The U.S. Agency's 2016 national assessment of hydraulic fracturing's impacts reviewed thousands of cases and , finding evidence of isolated effects under specific circumstances—such as poor well construction—but no indication of widespread, systemic contamination from processes. Experts, including geologists, have noted that claims in Gasland often prioritize anecdotal reports over empirical data, ignoring geological barriers like impermeable layers that prevent upward migration of fracking fluids over thousands of feet to aquifers.

Sequel and Extensions

Gasland Part II Overview

![Josh Fox - Filmmaker - playing banjo 2011-11-05.jpg][float-right] Gasland Part II is a 2013 American documentary film directed and narrated by Josh Fox, serving as a sequel to his 2010 film Gasland. Premiered on HBO on July 8, 2013, the film runs approximately 125 minutes and investigates the hydraulic fracturing (fracking) process for natural gas extraction, asserting that it poses severe long-term environmental, health, and seismic risks. Fox expands on themes from the original by focusing on the industry's portrayal of natural gas as a "bridge fuel" to cleaner energy, which the film contends is misleading due to inherent dangers and systemic failures. The documentary claims that fracked wells inevitably leak over time, contaminating and air with chemicals and —a potent —leading to health issues among nearby residents and exacerbating . It highlights specific environmental impacts, including poisonous and induced earthquakes linked to injection from operations, drawing on cases from regions like , , and even international examples such as where early attempts triggered seismic activity. Through interviews with affected families, , and whistleblowers, Fox presents visual evidence of contamination and structural failures in well casings. Politically, Gasland Part II scrutinizes the influence of the oil and gas lobby, tracing regulatory exemptions granted via the 2005 Energy Policy Act that shielded from certain federal environmental laws like the Clean Water Act and . The film alleges a web of corporate and governmental collusion, including the use of anti-terrorism tactics against activists and economic pressures promoting fracking's global expansion despite risks. Fox structures the around personal stories from fracking-impacted communities alongside archival and to argue that industry-driven policies prioritize profits over public welfare.

Reception of the Sequel

Gasland Part II, released in 2013, garnered mixed critical reception, with an approval rating of 73% on based on 28 reviews, reflecting praise for its advocacy against hydraulic fracturing while noting stylistic and evidentiary shortcomings. Reviewers from outlets like described it as painting a "convincing picture" of fracking's perils, emphasizing its focus on industry influence and . Similarly, acknowledged its success in continuing the "crusade against the ill effects of ," though critiquing its density and occasional lack of focus. Industry observers and fact-checkers, however, lambasted the film for recycling debunked imagery and unsubstantiated assertions from the original Gasland. Energy In Depth, an industry advocacy group, highlighted repeated use of misleading visuals, such as uncontaminated water ignitions predating activities, and accused it of promoting theories about collusion without empirical backing. A POWER magazine analysis echoed this, pointing to the film's reliance on anecdotal horror stories over peer-reviewed data, including unsubstantiated claims of widespread contradicted by a 2013 U.S. Department of Energy study finding no evidence of fracking-related contamination in aquifers. Audience responses varied, with IMDb user reviews describing it as "scary" and reality-facing but marred by "questionable stylistic choices" and overreliance on emotional appeals rather than rigorous science. Intelligence labeled it "anti-drilling " that extended runtime without adding substantive new insights, prioritizing alarmism over balanced analysis. Despite these critiques, the sequel reinforced anti-fracking sentiment among environmental activists, though its evidentiary weaknesses—such as ignoring advancements in well integrity and seismic monitoring—drew rebukes for undermining credible discourse on energy extraction risks.

Legacy and Broader Impact

Influence on Public Opinion and Policy

The release of Gasland in 2010 correlated with a marked increase in public discourse on hydraulic fracturing, as evidenced by spikes in Google searches for terms related to fracking risks, such as water contamination and bans, alongside heightened Twitter activity on these topics. A peer-reviewed analysis of internet and social media data found that the documentary not only boosted online engagement but also facilitated the mobilization of local anti-fracking campaigns, with screenings in specific areas preceding organized opposition efforts. This contributed to a broader shift in public perceptions toward viewing fracking as environmentally hazardous, though subsequent surveys, such as a 2014 poll, revealed low trust in Gasland itself as a reliable source, ranking it among the least credible on the issue alongside industry representatives. On the policy front, Gasland screenings were presented to U.S. Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency, and state legislatures, including in New York and Pennsylvania, amplifying calls for regulatory oversight. The film explicitly advocated for the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act (FRAC Act), introduced in 2009 and reintroduced in 2011, which aimed to repeal the exemption of hydraulic fracturing fluids from the Safe Drinking Water Act. While the FRAC Act did not pass, Gasland helped sustain national debates on federal regulation amid the 2005 Energy Policy Act's "Halliburton loophole." At the state and local levels, it fueled grassroots pressure leading to moratoria and bans; for instance, local screenings preceded fracking prohibitions in areas like Tompkins County, New York, and contributed to New York's extension of its statewide moratorium—initially imposed in 2008—culminating in a formal ban on high-volume hydraulic fracturing in June 2015 following a health impact assessment. These outcomes reflected causal links between documentary-driven mobilizations and policy restrictions in regions with active screenings, though broader fracking expansion elsewhere underscored limits to its national sway.

Evaluation in Light of Fracking Outcomes

Since the release of Gasland in 2010, hydraulic fracturing combined with horizontal drilling has driven a massive expansion in U.S. shale gas production, rising from approximately 5 trillion cubic feet in 2010 to 26 trillion cubic feet by 2020, accounting for 78% of total dry natural gas output. This surge contributed to the U.S. achieving net natural gas exports by 2017 and greater energy independence, displacing coal-fired power generation and reducing economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions per capita by an estimated 7.5% through fuel switching. Economically, the shale boom supported over 600,000 jobs in 2010, growing to nearly 870,000 by 2015, while driving 10% of U.S. GDP growth between 2010 and 2015 via increased production efficiency and export revenues that improved the trade balance. Empirical assessments of environmental risks have not substantiated the documentary's portrayal of systemic, irreversible contamination. The U.S. Agency's 2016 hydraulic fracturing assessment concluded that while impacts to resources can occur under specific circumstances—such as poor well or spills—these are not widespread, with most documented cases linked to localized failures rather than inherent process flaws. Peer-reviewed reviews affirm that risks from fracturing fluids exist but are mitigated by casing, cementing, and disclosure regulations implemented post-2010, with no evidence of broad-scale across millions of wells drilled. , another concern, primarily stems from wastewater injection rather than fracturing itself; U.S. Geological Survey data indicate only 2% of Oklahoma's earthquakes (the epicenter of such events) are directly tied to fracturing, with peak activity in the mid-2010s reduced by over 80% through injection volume limits and permitting reforms. In regions of intensive development, such as the Marcellus and Permian basins, long-term monitoring has shown air emissions declines due to capture technologies and lower leakage rates than initially feared, contributing to net environmental gains over dependency. While isolated incidents, like the Pavilion, Wyoming case involving potential migration of fracturing compounds, highlight the need for ongoing oversight, these do not reflect outcomes across the industry's scale, where production quadrupled without corresponding epidemics of or habitability crises predicted in Gasland. Regulatory adaptations, including state-level bans on high-risk practices in areas like Colorado's , have addressed vulnerabilities without halting the sector's viability, underscoring that empirical risks—though real—have been managed proportionally to benefits in and emissions reductions.

References

  1. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1558250/
  2. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/gasland
  3. https://www.npr.org/2011/02/24/134031183/Gasland-Takes-On-Natural-Gas-Drilling-Industry
  4. https://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/02/24/24greenwire-groundtruthing-academy-award-nominee-gasland-33228.html
  5. https://reason.com/2013/07/05/the-top-5-lies-about-fracking/
  6. https://www.energyindepth.org/gasland-debunked/
  7. https://southerngas.org/download/feb-post-5-fracking-sets-water-on-fire/
  8. https://www.energyindepth.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Debunking-Gasland.pdf
  9. https://www.powermag.com/gasland-part-ii-same-misleading-images-new-conspiracy-theory/
  10. https://freebeacon.com/politics/fact-checking-gasland-part-ii/
  11. https://www.[factcheck.org](/page/FactCheck.org)/2015/06/clearing-up-claims-on-epa-fracking-study/
  12. https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/onshore-drilling-disasters-waiting-happen-interview-gasland-director-josh-fox/
  13. https://www.cbsnews.com/media/qa-with-oscar-nominated-gasland-filmmaker-josh-fox/
  14. https://www.npr.org/transcripts/127593937?storyId=127593937
  15. https://www.texastribune.org/2010/07/02/josh-fox-gasland-creator-on-hazards-fracking/
  16. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/oct/28/gasland-director-josh-fox-on-fighting-long-covid-the-frontlines-were-inside-my-head
  17. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/?p=75249
  18. https://www.newsweek.com/josh-foxs-new-hbo-documentary-gasland-73509
  19. https://impactguide.org/static/library/Gasland.pdf
  20. https://www.indiewire.com/news/general-news/sundance-10-gasland-director-josh-fox-on-being-a-one-man-crew-245898/
  21. https://www.alphavillejournal.com/Issue17/HTML/ReviewCulloty.html
  22. https://www.npr.org/2010/06/10/127593937/josh-fox-living-in-the-middle-of-a-gasland
  23. http://www.photoforward.org/uploads/1/0/5/3/10531249/gasland_study_guide_print.pdf
  24. https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/33j6m0/i_am_josh_fox_writerdirector_of_gasland/
  25. https://www.sundance.org/blogs/29-documentaries-receive-582000-in-grants-from-sundance-institute-documentary-film-program-3/
  26. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/with-gasland-part-ii-the-battle-over-frackings-safety-is-rejoined/2013/07/18/6365961a-ea44-11e2-aa9f-c03a72e2d342_story.html
  27. https://www.nrdc.org/bio/kate-sinding/gasland-premiere-must-see-expose-industrial-gas-productions-risks-airs-tonight-hbo
  28. https://www.cinemamanagementgroup.com/film/gasland/
  29. https://www.zinnedproject.org/materials/gasland/
  30. https://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2025/01/documentary-review-gasland-and-gasland-part-ii-explore-the-devastating-consequences-of-frackings-proliferation.html
  31. https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/Technology/filmmaker-blasts-energy-alternative/story?id=10993095
  32. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/21/arts/television/21gasland.html
  33. https://earthrights.org/blog/fracking-really-freaks-me-out/
  34. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1558250/releaseinfo/
  35. https://www.recordonline.com/story/news/2010/02/01/pa-filmmaker-s-documentary-wins/51720509007/
  36. https://www.citizen.org/news/gasland-nominated-for-academy-award/
  37. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1558250/awards/
  38. https://grist.org/natural-gas/2011-09-14-josh-fox-natural-gas-fracking-documentary-gasland-wins-emmy/
  39. https://www.hammertonail.com/reviews/documentary/gasland-film-review/
  40. https://www.newcityfilm.com/2010/07/14/review-gasland/
  41. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2011/jan/13/gasland-review
  42. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/gasland/reviews
  43. https://www.cred.org/is-fracking-connected-to-burning-tap-water/
  44. https://energyindepth.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Debunking-Gasland.pdf
  45. https://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2011/12/19/flaming-taps-methane-migration-and-the-fracking-debate/
  46. https://www.naturalgasintel.com/news/gasland-director-gets-a-note-from-energy-industry/
  47. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2012.11543
  48. https://www.dbstephens.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Stephens_GWJ-Aug-2014_Pavillion.pdf
  49. https://energyindepth.org/gasland-debunked/
  50. https://www.api.org/~/media/files/news/2012/12-july/what-the-critics-say-about-gasland.ashx
  51. https://www.energyindepth.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/GASLAND-DOC.pdf
  52. https://nicholas.duke.edu/news/study-finds-no-evidence-water-contamination-shale-gas-drilling-arkansas
  53. https://heartland.org/publications/research-commentary-peer-reviewed-study-says-hydraulic-fracturing-not-responsible-for-groundwater-contamination-in-west-virginia/
  54. https://www.energyindepth.org/first-ever-utica-shale-groundwater-fracking-study-published/
  55. https://www.energyindepth.org/fourth-peer-reviewed-study-this-year-finds-no-evidence-groundwater-contamination-from-fracking/
  56. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-12/documents/hfdwa_executive_summary.pdf
  57. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2012/07/23/experts-some-fracking-critics-use-bad-science
  58. https://www.realclearpolicy.com/blog/2015/10/27/debunking_gasland_again_1453.html
  59. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2795078/
  60. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/gasland_part_ii_2013_2
  61. https://www.democracynow.org/2013/7/12/josh_fox_on_gasland_part_2
  62. https://dianerehm.org/shows/2013-07-09/josh-fox-gasland-part-ii
  63. https://grist.org/climate-energy/josh-foxs-gasland-ii-to-expose-power-politics-of-fracking/
  64. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jul/03/josh-fox-gasland-oscar-fracking
  65. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/06/arts/television/josh-foxs-gasland-part-ii-is-to-be-shown-on-hbo.html
  66. https://www.indiewire.com/features/general/gasland-gets-a-sequel-but-does-it-offer-anything-new-looking-at-hbos-gasland-part-ii-37079/
  67. https://www.energyindepth.org/debunking-gasland-part-ii-2/
  68. https://www.the-american-interest.com/2013/07/21/fact-checking-gasland-part-ii/
  69. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2795078/reviews/
  70. https://naturalgasintel.com/news/gasland-ii-seen-as-anti-drilling-propaganda/
  71. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/07/10/fiction-masquerading-as-news-in-the-oil-and-gas-shale-world/
  72. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0003122415598534
  73. https://www.asanet.org/study-uses-internet-and-social-media-show-how-fracking-documentary-influenced-public-perception-and/
  74. https://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2014/06/16/survey-public-distrusts-gas-industry-and-anti-fracking-film-gasland/
  75. https://www.oilandgaslawyerblog.com/movie-gasland-stirs-more-contr/
  76. https://docimpacthi5.org/files/gasland.pdf
  77. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/02/gasland-hbo-documentary-fracking-opposition
  78. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10038223/
  79. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988325002129
  80. https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/fossil-fuels/gas-and-oil/jobs-boom-shale-gas-industry-employment-up-45-percent-by-2015/
  81. https://www.energyindepth.org/us-shale-industry-credited-with-driving-10-of-us-gdp-growth/
  82. https://www.epa.gov/hfstudy/questions-and-answers-about-epas-hydraulic-fracturing-drinking-water-assessment
  83. https://jacksonlab.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj20871/files/media/file/jackson_et_al._arer_2014.pdf
  84. https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/does-fracking-cause-earthquakes
  85. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-resource-110320-092648
  86. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fracking-can-contaminate-drinking-water/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.