An Interview with Trilby Lundberg (or, Prof. Goose May Have a New Sworn Enemy)

I feel the need to bring you an interview with Trilby Lundberg of the Lundberg Survey that's on CNN right now. The link to the interview is here. (Hat tip to TOD reader damac as well. Thanks.)

Q: As far as conservation, what are the trends you are seeing?

A: I'm hoping that consumers will see through the rhetoric about consuming less, demanding less, as faulty. It is not a given that consuming less will be good for our economy or for our personal freedom. It is not even established for our environment that we [should] deprive ourselves of gasoline for our personal mobility as well our commerce. And to suppose that it is good to do that, and pretend that we have consensus and put our heads together to deprive ourselves of this great product that makes the country go around, commercially and individually, I think is flawed. I'm hoping consumers and voters will see through that and be able to ignore some of the most extreme suggestions.

I think that there has been friendly as well as unfriendly brainwashing taking place. And when I say friendly and unfriendly, I'm talking about decades of extremist views that have now achieved mainstream acceptance. And the No. 1 item among those affecting current oil politics in Washington is the boogeyman, also known as global warming.

I don't accept it as established fact, nor do I accept that it would be caused by petroleum consumption, nor do I accept that the human species should not affect its environment. So even if it were someday to be shown to have some small effect on the environment, I see no crime. In fact, taking into account the many, many millions of people around the world that envy our way of life, it would seem more humanitarian to wish them the kind of plentiful petroleum products and vehicles ... that we enjoy ... to lift themselves out of [a] backward, poor way of life.

This is the person the media relies upon to discuss gasoline prices and supply?! As tempted as I am to say something else smart or clever here, instead, I will just let her statement speak for itself.

So, you see, doomerism is predicated on a very firm foundation:

Human frailty.

Frailty is but one face of human arrogance too, which this woman exhibits an abundance of. In this case it comes through in this snippet:

nor do I accept that the human species should not affect its environment.

This woman and people like her do not have any realtionship with 'creation' and all this term embraces and entails -- except perhaps in detesting and denying it -- by spending most all their lives in an 'environment'; preferably the man-made kind of wealth and luxurious comfort far removed from the "backward, poor way of life."

This feckless word, environment, is perfectly suited to such disembodiment from creation and it's underlying mystery and horror.

Boy oh boy, is she in for a surprise.

Holy Crap!!! Even if this woman's ethical perspective made any sense whatsoever, her fantasy of continuing the American dream orgy ain't gonna happen, global warming or not.

Best hopes for a lot more simplicity and elegant, simple living on an ever endangered planet. If people are really envying this endangered and increasingly unsustainable way of life, then we need to disabuse them of the notion that the American way of life makes any sense for us, much less an entire planet.

If only these so called extremist views were really part of the mainstream. I see the mainstream every day and I guarantee it is not even close to adopting these so called extremist views. In America, excess continues to rule and is in little danger of voluntarily going away. Bling and more bling is the obscene American way.

Global warming, species destruction, depletion of resources, and energy is established whether this woman like it or not.

We will be damn lucky if we even survive and this woman wants to continue the excess standard. It's throw up time.

Here's a letter to the editor from the Santa Rosa, CA Press Democrat from someone who is on an intellectual plane with Ms Lundberg:

(begin quote)
Debate not over
EDITOR: Except for people who positioned themselves to be significant share holders of oil stocks, we all want energy alternatives that are easier on the environment and our pocket books. However, Al Gore and his easily aroused Hollywood bandwagon have turned this into a political circus. Shame on Gore to claim "the debate is over."
One of the most brilliant men of our day, Michael Crichton, Harvard College grad summa cum laude and author of "Andromeda Strain," "Jurassic Park," and "State of Fear," to name a few works, researched global warming for over two years.

Crichton concluded "our approach to global warming exemplifies everything that is wrong with our approach to the environment. We are basing our decisions on speculation, not evidence. Proponents are pressing their views with more PR than scientific data. Why are we morally unjustified to spend vast sums on this speculative issue when around the world people are dying of starvation and disease?"

It is not sexy and does not have enough political gain for Gore and Hollywood to fight old-fashioned disease and starvation. Somehow we have to talk the liberal left out of the tree and get engaged with issues we know are factual and threatening. Together we can move mountains.

(end quote)

With this kind of mental horsepower in the voting booth is it any wonder the world is in the shape it is in? It amazes me how many people continue to relate notions of well being with having more stuff. As Americans slide down into a quagmire of lower real wages, less freedom, higher anxiety in their lives the belief that by working harder they will be richer and therefore happier seems to be indestructable. Peak Oil? Climate Change? Can't see it from my house........

(Can someone remind me how to block quotes and reference material??)

As I've said before, people in my area will not "vote" for Global Warming or Peak Oil...they will just reject it out of hand as some liberal plot against America. My WAG is that about 40% or more of the US population will actively oppose any efforts to mitigate the issue. This, combined with the opposition from the entities which have a vested interest in the status quo, assures us that a gradual powerdown is untenable in the US.

Of course no one will 'vote' for Global Warming (and I was about to abbreviate that as 'GW'- fine irony, hmm?) or Peak Oil. Those possibilities are both unnerving to say the least. Unfortunately, we're taking the 'monster in the closet' approach. Keep the door closed, and as long as I can't SEE it, we're OK.

As a kid, I loved listening to the stories my grandparents would tell. I simply couldn't fathom some of the things from the Great Depression. Their stories from WWII were equally fascinating. The notion of gas rationing, and 'drives' for various raw materials seemed quaint. Buying bonds for a greater purpose was curious.

Want to bet these things rear their ugly heads?

Of course no one will 'vote' for Global Warming

So far the only Global Warming apparent to many people in the U.S. is warmer and shorter winters. Many would vote in favor of that.

(Can someone remind me how to block quotes and reference material??)

<*blockquote>(Can someone remind me how to block quotes and reference material??)<*/blockquote>

To get this to work just remove the asterisks (ie. the *) from the text above.

To reference material, the simplest way is to cut and paste links from the address bar of your browser.

However, if you want to create in-line links inside paragraphs, the form is as follows. Again, you'll need to omit the asterisks to make it work.

Press <*a href="">here<*/a> to go to The Oil Drum

If you remove the two asterisks, it will look like this.

Press here to go to The Oil Drum

If you use firefox,

In general, any time you want to know how some HTML is coded - highlight the text of interest, right click to open
a menu and scroll down to 'view selection source' and click. That will bing up a box with the marked up text and show all tags.

Where IS that 'Theory of Everything' ?
it is !

Where IS that 'Theory of Everything' ?
it is !

Thanks, I wondered where I left it. Apparently it was behind a Bush. The rabbit hole only begins with a TOE. Once you realize that the work is redundant, you start to comprehend the active groups working to make it insignificant in the Consumption World which doesn't WANT to know, because learning to cooperate with the universe is much harder than buying stuff.

The next thing you know, you'll be watching for UFOs and wondering why they don't land on the White House lawn.

I couldn't decide what to call my post on Ms Lundberg's comments.

"Trilby Lundberg smokes crack."
"Al Qaeda sleeper terrorist exposed in CNN interview."
"Burn your money for economic prosperity."
"Give now for Latin American dictators."

the list goes on.... Sad and depressing, but not unexpected. Oh, and I found this MySpace entry in which the poster writes, "Not stuff you hear from the main stream news outlets. Kudo's to CNN for posting it."

How about,

"But Iago, the pity of it, Iago."

A real piece of work trilby is...from her brother's website:

Jesus, are all these Lundbergs related? This is getting confusing quick... Never mix hydrocarbon business and environmentalism in a family, I guess is the lesson here--in addition to the usual prattle.

Do you think this is just a case of "rebellion" against her father's own sometimes extremist views? In other words, are we seeing a familial/culture clash?


Its obvious that Trilby is still under Svengali's evil spell!

or since I'm being literary "Oh what a piece of work is man"-Shakespeare,"the Tempest", and, I might add, what a piece of work this woman is.

Its hard to understand how amazingly ignorant and obstinate the members of the "establishment" truly are. The total denial of any facts that suggest that people might examine their own behaviour and act responsibly is astounding. Ms. Lundberg is obviously parroting the views that she thinks will gain her the most clients-market research is all about sales after all, and that collapses if the consumer society changes.

When you are driving in your Benz, with your Black AMex steady in your louis vuitton purse, smoking some Dunhills thinking about your fat cats at home purring, everything is Jolly-Well-Fine-Goddamnit. Always has been, always will be! What's there to worry about? La La La La La...

Tribly Lundberg

//” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors. //” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

[My apologies to MSNBC for hotlinking, and certainly to all of you! Also, I hope posting pictures, citing facts, and endorsing durable rugged leather doesn't constitute slander.]

Peak oil, yes. Man made climate change, no... the facts don't support it. But then, why let facts get in the way of prejudice!

People hear about global warming and the head goes into the sand, but that leaves certain parts of them exposed to be buggered by the enourmous phallis of peak oil!!

CO2 is a greenhouse gas
We are realeasing more of it than can be taken up by natural sources, its that simple really

We are all wrong!!

Also Debunking Overpopulation in 5 Minutes may interest any other population cornucopians, like myself... Thanks, I had never seen these. There seems to be a women in the background strumming a guitar and softly singing or whispering to the guy doing the "debunking". (Even more funny are the few peoples' righteous indignation at the PO video who fail to understand it!)

That is a beautiful fetus, I must say...

Congrats memmel. In how many months is it due?

Hi memmel, I've been following the seasonal cryospheric ebb and flow too. This year really is something, it's amazing how little attention it has received.. maybe no-one else is looking???

I also read the article and was amazed. This woman just makes SH*T up. How can someone with so little rigour pass off as an expert?

Yep, and she is THE go-to person for the media on gas prices.

I think that says it all.

CNN is always choosing weired people coming from nowhere, most often self-taught experts about an important subject.

For instance, this morning, a guy with a nice suit pretending being a "Terrorism consultant" was telling us that Al-Qaeda was coming back, was stronger than ever and will probably strike the the US anytime soon. Of course, no facts or unverifiable speculative statements, etc.. What's amazing it's the fact hat this guy has launched a lucrative business based on fear mongering and potential bias does not seem to bother CNN journalists? same about global warming.

Note the "Iron Triangle" pattern: An energy analyst (from the oil industry group), in effect advises everyone to "Party On Dude!" and the media group, which wants to continue selling advertising to the auto/housing/finance group, is more than happy to pass the message on.

The implied message coming out of the Iron Triangle is that there is no problem with an infinite rate of increase in the consumption of a finite energy resource base, i.e., "Party On."

So "Joe Consumer," who is inclined to believe the "Party On" message, continues to go into debt.

In a sense, the last sentence quoted above is either ethnocentrism or amazing ignorance. This is because it is plainly obvious to anyone with even a remote knowledge of the world energy supply/demand that for the country of China alone to achieve comparable per capita oil use as the US would require daily oil consumption of ~100 mbpd or so. Forget about India and the rest of the developing world.
I would think that as extreme as her views appear to be, even she would not claim that oil production rates could go above 150-160 mbpd. So, my conclusion is that she is basically saying that it is the US's right to consume a disproportionate share of the world's remaining oil resources and we should be happy that other countries are left to envy our way of life.


You people just shut up and keep driving if you know what's good for you.

The powers that be require complete obedience. Do not look at the man behind the curtain!!!

GO back to sleep. NOW.

I think the puppet on the right shares my views.
I think the puppet on the left shares my views.

Hey theres one guy holding up both puppets!

Shut up

RIP Bill Hicks - Love Laughter Truth

OMGWTF--Funny you should mention Bill Hicks, those parodies upthread really reminded me of Bill Hicks... If he were still alive, he'd surely have something hysterically-unpredictably amusing to say about our dear dear good friend Ms. Lundberg (Mrs.?*ouch*) It would perhaps compare her to Satan, but ah, that's too easy--he would be more than a decade better now (just like Carlin has improved in time).

I'm sure quite a few wealthy Jews in Berlin during the 1930's had similar viewpoints to the one espoused here. Or stock brokers in 1929.

Sometimes TSHTF and opinions are not relevant. I'm actually not happy about the turn of events I don't want to be part of a crisis generation its not fun at all. Call me selfish but I'd rather peruse my own personal interests and raise my children. Sometimes things simply don't work out like you want them too.

Remember that the only reason peak oil is and issue is because of greed. If you reed this persons statements what they are really doing is justifying unconstrained greed. As with all things done in excess your sure to lose in the end.

Nothing new here.

Peak oil and global warming are a mortal threat to the culture of conspicious consumption to which many people, apparently including Ms. Lundberg, are deeply attached. Of course they're going to deny reality right up until the moment they can't get another fillup for their Lincoln Navigator.

I'm not familiar with Lundberg, but apparently she publishes a report on gas prices. I'm a bit confused -how exactly does that make her an authority on either of these topics?

Surely the Apocalypse (lifting of the veil) is nigh, now that we have clearly identified the antichrist.

Well, this summer's "terrorist attacks" and the (nuclear) response will render all of this moot shortly I'm afraid.

I think the scariest part is not what she says, but from where she, and many others, think. Contrast it with Nate Hagens comment earlier today of, paraphrasing, "I'm happiest when walking in an old growth forest"

Her ilk continue to believe we must subjugate the earth, and wouldn't care less, even prefer, a world of buildings, malls, factories, and industrial ag food production areas, with perhaps a well designed park of introduced species in delineated spots. Any evidence that this may not be in our best interests is brushed out the window.

Doug: Hate to be redundant, but her mentality is far, far more prevalent in China than it is in the USA. There is a lot of bashing of ugly Americans on this site, but in reality a relatively high % of Americans are tree huggers "who are most happy walking in an old growth forest". To a certain extent her view represents the future, globally speaking.

I see your wands share the same phoenix feather.....

Sorry, I couldn't resist the Harry Potter analogy since I saw the Order of Phoenix last night at midnight....

I was going to save this for Drumbeat, but it seems to fit better in here:

Storm World: Hurricanes, Politics, and the Battle over Global Warming

How exactly does global warming relate to the frequency and ferocity of hurricanes? Not only do leading scientists tend to disagree over the details, but the debate is sharpened by the Bush administration-imposed controls on what scientists are allowed to say.

Chris Mooney is a leading science journalist and he is just out with a book tackling this very question. It’s called “Storm World: Hurricanes, Politics, and the Battle over Global Warming.”

Mooney is the Washington correspondent for Seed Magazine and author of the New York Times bestseller “The Republican War on Science.”

AMY GOODMAN: And what about the push to nuclear power now, a new movement toward nuclear power? You start to hear President Bush, now he’s using the word “global warming,” but he’s also talking about nuclear power plants.

CHRIS MOONEY: Yeah. Well, you know, I mean, we definitely, in this country, we get a lot of energy from nuclear power. I think that what we need to do to deal with -- to replace a lot of the fossil fuel burning that we’re doing now is we need to increase energy efficiency generally. We clearly can’t go off nuclear power. I mean, we’re very dependent upon it. Whether we ramp up, I think, is problematic, and that’s another issue. We need to bring online a lot of renewable energy sources that will help us deal with the problem. There’s not going to be any one fix. It’s going to be a portfolio of ways of getting energy.

As much as I dislike the ad hominem attack, and echoing Victor's remark above —

What could we possibly expect from somebody named Trilby?

Sorry, mea culpa, I couldn't help myself...

The trouble with Trilbys - I think I saw that episode.


"If you want Change, keep it in your pocket. You vote for a faux president every four years, but you vote for real corporations thousands of times each month. Your money is your only real vote."

I think a lot of the commenters are getting sidetracked by the ugliness (If she's married, I hope it's to someone just like her, so that only two people are miserable instead of four.), the apparent stupidity, and the blatant lies.

The key sentence is this one,

"It is not a given that consuming less will be good for our economy or for our personal freedom."

It is solely intended to reframe the conversation by excluding the effect which wasteful behavior has on human ethics. If a child is given candy every time they whine, then they will not only get rotted teeth, but will end up believing that whining is a good thing, and that candy is good for everyone.

The problem which peak oil and global warming is really showing us is that the undisciplined behavior of consumption, whether it is oil, gas, people, corn, sugar, or free energy, needs to be put in check. By tying it to our 'freedom', she is telling everyone that it is some kind of right to consume beyond our planet's means. The question which everyone should always ask is this, "What are humans contributing to the universe in exchange for this consumption?" In other words; what is our Net Creativity?

Consumption itself is a problem, waste itself is a symptom, but the lack of purpose to it is the real elephant in the room. What are people FOR?

Trilby thinks it is to Consume and worship Consumption in the name of Freedom to Consume.

It's all about Compassionate Conservative Consumerism.

When you Consume you Conserve.

When you Consume you Conserve (our non-negotiable way of life).

Bill Clinton used to say, "It's the Economy, stupid".

According to the New York Times though, the new saying may be: It's the Economist [who's] stupid --for not challenging orthodoxy

(According to the NYT, some economics scholars are actually questioning whether The Free Markets will deliver. Oh me gosh, what's the world coming to?)

step back - thanks for the pic, my new avatar at

Bill Hicks, yes. "You are free! Free to do what we tell you! You ARE FREE!"

Serendipitously, this answer was chosen as the best to the Yahoo question,
Could usa become as bad as nazi germany? Has the usa become as bad as nazi germany?

The answer is that it is different. Worse? That depends if you are a fish, a chicken, or a cow or a Nintendo-addicted wage slave.
The real question is whether or not the U.S. knows what it is doing or not. So far, it appears to be a country full of 12 year old boys watching porn movies being led by 19 year old boys with very big guns and an unlimited debt budget, who think that bravado and force will overcome any opposition to their conquests.
Is this worse than National Socialism? Corporatism? Depends if you own the company, I guess. In the LONG term, Nature will decide whether the human species has value to contribute to the universe, and will act accordingly. We can speed up or slow down the judgement with our actions, perhaps even change the course of the judgement, but unless we wake up and pay attention, our choices are very limited to change the direction of our consumption-based nightmare at this point.
I guess that's why it could be worse than Hitler's Germany. The Germans knew they could lay down their arms and walk away from a battle. Americans don't know that the weapons they are using to enslave and destroy the planet are disguised as Mocha Latte's, Hummers, and McHouses, and they have no reason to lay these things aside and live in any thoughtful, sustainable, cooperative manner as long as the Game and Competition continue to thrill them.
Hitler's death toll was in the millions. Ours will be in the billions at the rate we are going. Some of the fault lies with the overpopulated that will die, but most lies with the lack of mature leadership in our past and the religions of Us vs. Them keeping people placated with Heavenly behaviors that have little to do with the needs of the soil which nurtures us.

There are some enemies that one can be proud of having as enemies. Ms. Lundberg is an enemy that one can be quite proud of having as an enemy.


Is she one of the unknowable know-it-alls or knowable unknowingalls?