For instance, I’d like to see a complimentary study on how many excess deaths in developing countries resulted from consumption of beef, pork and poultry 2010. That’s because in 2010 37% of the U.S. corn crop was diverted to feed livestock — more than other other use — according to the USDA. I’m worried that the love for burgers, bacon and chicken wings, which is gaining popularity in mega-markets like China and Indian, is making food more expensive, which starves poor people.

Simultaneously. I’d like to see a complimentary study on how many excess deaths in developing countries resulted from the $79.52/bbl average price of petroleum in 2010, which, as a major cost input for the production, processing and distribution of food, makes food more expensive, which starves poor people. Was that part of Dr. Goklany’s study? Or did he just want to indict renewable fuels?

Finally, I’m curious to know how the very premise of this blog, global warming — which is caused by burning fossil fuels and is bad for growing food crops in parts of the world where people would like to them — is making food more expensive, which starves poor people. Do we think global warming had more or less blame than renewable fuels in the number of poor people “killed” in 2010?

Seriously, the premise of the study is as specious as its conclusions are offensive.

If you or Dr. Goklany can tell us by what percentage ethanol increased the cost of food (link to the study please?) perhaps you might then consider an alternative question for a study on excess deaths:

What else in the global grain supply “killed” people in 2010?