While the details of the conference were in danger of being overlooked in the hubbub surrounding the unwelcome and unexpected attendance of Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe, some aid groups called for an African ‘green revolution’, while UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon argued that food production would have to grow by 50% by 2030 to stave off starvation. Hungry people, he warned, are angry people – a redundant observation, perhaps, given the doubling in food prices this past year has already seen riots from Buenos Aires to Manila.

There are some forces driving the current food crisis that this week’s UN food summit can’t tackle, says The Guardian, be it terrible harvests or rising demand from China and India. However, “there is one measure ministers might take that could have a real and rapid impact: call a go-slow on biofuels”. According to the International Monetary Fund, biofuels have been responsible for 20%-30% of the rise in food prices.

And the Secretary General of the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation, Jacques Diouf, pulled no punches in denouncing America’s policy of diverting 100 million tonnes of cereals from human consumption “to satisfy a thirst for fuel for vehicles.”

Be that as it may, biofuels “have got too much attention”, says Bronwen Maddox in The Times, and the World Bank’s Robert Zoellick “rightly called for the issue not to dominate the summit”. Indeed, “a cocktail of factors – low stocks and a weak dollar, soaring energy prices, and “a hunger for richer foods” have also contributed to the current crisis, says the BBC’s Stephanie Holmes.

Even so, “politicians in Europe and America should recognise that the subsidised growing of bio-fuels has been an error”, says The Daily Telegraph. “Yet the EU refuses to accept this is mistaken and has decided that 10% of all transport fuel should come from biofuels by 2020. The subsidies should be repealed.”

Source: Biofuels Power Global Food Crisis Talks

Don’t panic – yet – if you live in Britain, because we’re not talking about dear old Blighty. But across the Channel, Jean Claude Trichet is talking tough. He’s the president of the European Central Bank (ECB), in charge of guarding the value of the newest big kid on the global currency block, the nearly 10-year old euro.

And now he’s fast becoming the hero of inflation fighters everywhere. Because yesterday, amid the usual turgid guff that central bankers usually churn out when they’re doing nothing very much, he came up with a bit of a bombshell – an imminent interest rate rise.

Although key rates are being kept unchanged for now, the ECB’s Governing Council has been getting more and more twitchy about climbing consumer prices which have risen “significantly” since last autumn due to soaring energy and food prices. And now Monsieur Trichet and co. expect inflation to stay high for longer than it first thought, because money supply is still growing too fast.

So not only are Euro central bankers staying “in a state of heightened alertness”, they’re prepared to “act in a firm and timely manner to ensure that medium term risks to price stability do not materialize”, and to show “strong determination to anchor medium and long-term inflation expectations in line with price stability.”

In short, expect an ECB rate hike next month.

It’s certainly seems to have come as a bit of a shock to many analysts. Just a week ago, Capital Economics was fairly confidently predicting that with eurozone inflation set to ease later this year, “the next move in interest rates should be down”.

But it’s good to see that some central bankers this side of the Atlantic are still taking their jobs seriously and trying to maintain the value of their currency. Which, it seems, the ECB can do rather more easily than Bank of England governor Mervyn King.

He’d probably like to do the same as the eurozone, with UK inflation seeping above the 3% mark at which he has to pen an open letter to Chancellor Darling explaining what’s gone wrong, but his hands are tied while the UK economy is falling off a cliff. And it looks like the knots are getting tighter by the day, with the unwelcome news that Mr Darling has now decided to give Mr King some extra outside ‘help’ in “advising” the Bank about “financial stability”.

That sounds horribly like Government-speak for finding ways to fiddle around with the Old Lady’s independence, and specifically to find ways of altering the Bank’s 2% inflation mandate. That would be a serious mistake – changing the target again would just chuck any remaining financial credibility the UK has left, right out of the window.

Talking of being a credible inflation-battling central banker, US Federal Reserve boss Ben Bernanke certainly isn’t one, having presided over a cavalier slashing of American interest rates in the face of a worse inflationary storm than the ECB is battling. But to be fair to the Fed, not quite all his colleagues are in quite the same boat.

Richmond Fed president Jeffrey Lacker has just ‘fessed up to his fears that the Fed’s lending to securities firms introduced in March could stoke up problems in the future, because it might “induce greater risk taking, which in turn could give rise to more frequent crises”.

In other words, we could soon be right back in the same boom-to bubble-to-bust mess from which we’re now suffering.

Thank goodness someone in authority in the US has seen the dangers. Though it’s a shame that Mr Lacker isn’t running the whole Stateside central bank show. Then we might see some rate rises over there, too.

Source: Why Europe’s Got It Right on Inflation

–Take the Mexican stand off between BHP and Rio Tinto. BHP feels its exposure to coking coal, oil, and gas gives it an earnings advantage over Rio. Not so!, says Rio. Rio says its exposure to iron ore, copper, and aluminium means it will grow is earnings more and sooner than BHP.

–Energy earnings versus metals earnings. It kind of reminds you of the Priority Dispute between Newton and Leibniz over who invented the calculus, doesn’t it? Chicken, egg. Egg, chicken. Cluck.

–Aluminium is an energy-intensive metal, and therefore more price sensitive in an energy-scarce world. This is to Rio’s advantage, the company reckons. “The price for aluminium now has a new base,” Rio’s chief economist Vivek Tulpule told investors in Melbourne this week.

–”Margins for existing aluminium producers who have cheap energy, their own bauxite, and who aren’t exposed to the Chinese currency, go up. This is a phenomenon that people have only started to clue on to very recently.”

[Editor's Note: We've been following this story closely in the Australian Small Cap Investigator, and Dan'd found a way you could profit from one Aussie stock. Sign up for a 3 month trial to find out more.]

–Tulpule also said that, “Though Chinese aluminium supply had traditionally risen in tandem with demand, keeping a lid on prices, soaring energy costs in China and rising bauxite costs had made Chinese producers the most expensive in the world.”

–In gold, the mantle of lowest-cost producer has always been coveted. In resource, the mantle of lowest-energy-intensity may be the key to figuring out which resources will go up the fastest. Energy-sensitive resources will see producers get hit hard by rising costs. This will cause some to close up shop, reducing production and supply. Prices will rise.

–”An energy shortage in Chile may do for copper what cuts in electricity supplies did for platinum in South Africa — spark a record-setting rally in prices,” according to Heather Walsh at Bloomberg. “Chile may be forced to limit power use for the first time since 1999 because a drought has reduced water levels at hydroelectric reservoirs.”

–Proximity and possession of energy may even better than access to cheap capital in coming years. Energy is a kind of capital, isn’t it? If that’s the case, Australia has a huge capital base, with its reserves of coal, natural gas, and uranium.

–Thermal coal prices are set to double from US$55 to US$125. That’s based on the agreement between Japan’s Chubu electric power and Xstrata which should be come the benchmark for 2000-09 contract prices. Spot prices for thermal coal have tripled in the last year. Spot coking coal (steel marking) prices have quadrupled in the last 12 months, and in the last two months they’ve doubled. Notice a pattern?

–”The value of announced cross-border acquisitions by China so far this calendar year is now US$24.5 billion from 56 deals according to Thomson Financial-already almost equaling the record of $US29.8 billion for all of 2007,” according to Colleen Ryan in the Financial Review. As usual in the financial world, the easiest way to find where asset prices are headed is to follow the money.

–”China’s acquisitions of foreign targets reached US$15 billion in the mining sector-the most active sector, largely comprising companies engaged in metals, mining, and chemicals-rising from just US$243 million in the same period last year,” Ryan writes. Are you listening BHP?

–While the great strategic game for control over Australia’s tangible resource wealth plays out here, a tawdry game of “hide the garbage assets” continues to play out in New York. “One look at the Goldman Sachs’ numbers Wednesday should tell you the credit crunch is far from over,” reports Liz Moyer at Forbes.

–”Despite the Federal Reserve’s dramatic efforts to shake loose the financial system, banks still can’t come up with accurate prices for hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of mortgage securities, corporate loans and other assets.”

– These assets that can’t be traded and which no one wants to buy are called Level Three assets, named for the part of the balance sheet on which they reside. The banks have stuck them there the way some people might stick a crazy Aunt in the attic to avoid being embarrassed in front of the neighbours. Shut up Aunt Tilda!

–There are a lot of Aunts in the attic. “Level 3 assets now make up 13% of the $771 billion of assets Goldman holds at fair value, according to regulatory filings. Of the $96 billion, Goldman is on the hook itself for $82 billion, and that ‘economic exposure’ is up 50% from the fourth quarter.” And it’s not just Goldman.

–”The increases from the fourth quarter in Level 3 exposures weren’t as stark at Morgan Stanley or at Lehman Brothers. Morgan Stanley had $78 billion of Level 3 assets, or 17% of its assets held at fair value, up 6% from last November. Lehman had $42.5 billion in Level 3 assets, 14% of assets held at fair value, up 1% from November. The three investment banks are the first of a series of banks to file their quarterly reports detailing Level 3 exposures. The total is only expected to rise.”