PDA

View Full Version : $400 per gallon



Qtec
12-03-2009, 07:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
$400 per gallon gas to drive debate over cost of war in Afghanistan
By Roxana Tiron - 10/15/09 07:34 PM ET

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>The Pentagon pays an average of $400 to put a gallon of fuel into a combat vehicle or aircraft in Afghanistan.<span style="color: #990000"> Chinook - A typical mission profile would include a gross weight of 45,000 pounds, fuel consumption of 2,400 pounds per hour (roughly 358 gallons), and 6,000 pounds (roughly 895 gallons) of fuel available at takeoff.
ie, just to fly the thing for an hour costs $140,000.
</span>

<u>The statistic is likely to play into the escalating debate in Congress over the cost of a war that entered its ninth year last week.</u> </span></div></div>

Guess not.

Q

pooltchr
12-03-2009, 08:05 AM
Why would anyone think that the cost of anything would be a determining factor in whether or not congress passes a bill????

Steve

llotter
12-03-2009, 10:43 AM
I wonder why it cost $400 per gallon for fuel? I think I could make a few calls and get it to them for a whole lot less than that.

pooltchr
12-03-2009, 10:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: llotter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wonder why it cost $400 per gallon for fuel? I think I could make a few calls and get it to them for a whole lot less than that. </div></div>

I would imagine there is a lot more calculated into that figure than just the fuel. Things like the cost of transporting it to where it is needed. I'm sure the fuel trucks travel in convoy with armed support, which isn't cheap. Logistics in the desert or in a mountain area can be quite involved.

Steve

sack316
12-03-2009, 11:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I would imagine there is a lot more calculated into that figure than just the fuel. Things like the cost of transporting it to where it is needed. I'm sure the fuel trucks travel in convoy with armed support, which isn't cheap. Logistics in the desert or in a mountain area can be quite involved.

Steve </div></div>

Very good Steve. A portion of the unlinked article that was not quoted says:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Afghanistan — with its lack of infrastructure, challenging geography and increased roadside bomb attacks — is a logistical nightmare for the U.S. military, according to congressional sources, and it is expensive to transport fuel and other supplies.


A landlocked country, Afghanistan has no seaports and a shortage of airports and navigable roads. The nearest port is in Karachi, Pakistan, where fuel for U.S. troops is shipped.


From there, commercial trucks transport the fuel through Pakistan and Afghanistan, sometimes changing carriers. Fuel is then transferred to storage locations in Afghanistan for movement within the country. Military transport is used to distribute fuel to forward operating bases. For many remote locations, this means fuel supplies must be provided by air.


One of the most expensive ways to supply fuel is by transporting it in bladders carried by helicopter; the amount that can be flown at one time can barely satisfy the need for fuel.


The cheapest way to transport fuel is usually by ship. Other reasonable methods to provide fuel are by rail and pipeline. The prices go up exponentially when aircraft are used, according to congressional sources.


The $400 per gallon reflects what in Pentagon parlance is known as the “fully burdened cost of fuel.”


“The fully burdened cost of fuel is a recognition that there are a lot of other factors that come into play,” said Mark Iden, the deputy director of operations at the Defense Energy Support Center (DESC), which provides fuel and energy to all U.S. military services worldwide.

</div></div>

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/63407-400gallon-gas-another-cost-of-war-in-afghanistan

Sack

pooltchr
12-03-2009, 12:45 PM
Not a bad guess, for an ingorant southern white bubba, huh?
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif
Steve

sack316
12-03-2009, 12:50 PM
not too shabby at all /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Sack