1) Do you agree with shale gas exploration in general?
No. In my opinion, shale gas exploration leads to irreversible environmental damage. It is not economically viable either. We should rather invest in eco-friendly initiatives such as bio-diesel and cane-ethanol.
2) Would still agree withit if those drilling will be done close to the community where you leave?
No. The entire area will become uninhabitable.
Bio diesel / ethanol have a much more devastating impact on the environment that fracking:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=244663902&sc=tw&cc=shareCORYDON, Iowa (AP) — The hills of southern Iowa bear the scars of America's push for green energy: The brown gashes where rain has washed away the soil. The polluted streams that dump fertilizer into the water supply.
Even the cemetery that disappeared like an apparition into a cornfield.
It wasn't supposed to be this way.
With the Iowa political caucuses on the horizon in 2007, presidential candidate Barack Obama made homegrown corn a centerpiece of his plan to slow global warming. And when President George W. Bush signed a law that year requiring oil companies to add billions of gallons of ethanol to their gasoline each year, Bush predicted it would make the country "stronger, cleaner and more secure."
But the ethanol era has proven far more damaging to the environment than politicians promised and much worse than the government admits today.
As farmers rushed to find new places to plant corn, they wiped out millions of acres of conservation land, destroyed habitat and polluted water supplies, an Associated Press investigation found.
Five million acres of land set aside for conservation — more than Yellowstone, Everglades and Yosemite National Parks combined — have vanished on Obama's watch.
Wind energy kills 100 000 of birds each year. So much so pres obama signed a pass on killing bold eagles for the next 30 years.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-house-gives-wind-farms-pass-on-killing-eagles/The Obama administration said Friday it will allow some companies to kill or injure bald and golden eagles for up to 30 years without penalty, an effort to spur development and investment in green energy while balancing its environmental consequences.
The change, requested by the wind energy industry, will provide legal protection for the lifespan of wind farms and other projects for which companies obtain a permit and make efforts to avoid killing the birds.
An investigation by The Associated Press earlier this year documented the illegal killing of eagles around wind farms, the Obama administration’s reluctance to prosecute such cases and its willingness to help keep the scope of the eagle deaths secret. The White House has championed wind power, a pollution-free energy intended to ease global warming, as a cornerstone of President Barack Obama’s energy plan.
What is the official position of the EPA regarding the risk of fracking and pollution? (hint: not a scientific position, but a political position)
http://rt.com/usa/epa-fracking-study-water-pollution-073/The US Environmental Protection Agency has dropped its plans to further investigate whether or not fracking led to the contamination of a Wyoming aquifer, and the agency no longer plans to write a report on the matter.
The EPA in 2011 released a draft report, which revealed that hydraulic fracturing fluids used at a shale gas drilling site had likely contaminated groundwater in Pavillion, Wyoming. Oil and gas companies have long argued that fracking poses no water contamination risks, but the EPA’s results demonstrated otherwise.
Critics of the findings, including Wyoming state officials and drilling advocates, argued that the EPA conducted a poor and inaccurate study, which could ultimately harm the industry. Despite the initial wave of criticism in 2011, EPA officials planned to resume the study and continue making assessments regarding the influence of fracking on groundwater. But the EPA on Thursday abandoned those plans, announcing that state officials will instead take over the investigation into Pavillion’s water pollution and draw up a conclusion in 2014.
http://www.psmag.com/environment/has-the-epa-given-up-on-fracking-63672/When the Environmental Protection Agency abruptly retreated on its multimillion-dollar investigation into water contamination in a central Wyoming natural gas field last month, it shocked environmentalists and energy industry supporters alike.
The videos you've posted are pseudo-science at best, kind of like the propaganda the cigarette industry used to promote back in the day. I've never actually watched all of Gasland so I can't really comment or verify whether it's 100% factual. 
. 
