NewsFeeder

Jalopnik: US Military Pays $400 A Gallon For Fuel In Afghanistan [I Feel Gassy]

8 posts in this topic

500x_Afghinastan_Gas.jpgThink last summer's $4 a gallon prices at the pump were painful? Imagine being the US Military, which pays around $400 a gallon in Afghanistan according to the Pentagon comptroller's office in a report to the House Appropriations Defense panel.

The report from the Pentagon comptroller was requested as a part of Obama administration's reconsideration of Afghanistan strategy. The price comes as a result of an investigation into why it costs approximately $1 billion a day to send every 1,000 troops into Afghanistan.

Now, there's a lot baked into that $400 a gallon price. Consider that in addition to the basic extraction and refinement costs of normal military fuel, priced at $2.78, it has to be sourced from secure facilities with high security to prevent sabotage, it must be transported across the regions difficult terrain and to remote locations using overland or air transit, and it must be guarded from attack at all times. It's also a variable price, and is not standard for all regions of Afghanistan, some areas are cheaper, and believe it or not, some are even more expensive, ranging up to $1,000 a gallon. Still, the $400 average price is nothing short of breathtaking. To put things in even more sobering terms, the report goes on to state the Marines alone, in one day in Afghanistan, consume an average of 800,000 gallons of fuel. [The Hill]

Photo Credit: LIU JIN/AFP/Getty Images

di
di

full?d=H0mrP-F8Qgo full?d=yIl2AUoC8zA full?i=3G1-wnZimHw:BZ0RjULj4GM:D7DqB2pKE full?i=3G1-wnZimHw:BZ0RjULj4GM:V_sGLiPBp
3G1-wnZimHw

View the full article
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the complaining of the CFC funds should shift to this topic now. That's a lot of tax payer dough being spent over there.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wars are expensive.

It's ridiculous how much money we've spent to fund our forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Think of how many highways that could fix, or how many schools and libraries that could build.

I don't think we should just pull out, but we need a more economical-friendly approach. Take out the enemy leaders, help the native people rebuild (within reason), and GTFO.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wars cost lots of money. Logistics cost lots of money. Flying in fuel to an obscure mountain top, in hostile territory, costs lots of money. 400 bucks per gallon, if you think about what needs to happen from the time the crude gets pumped out of the ground, refined, shipped , gets pumped into a fuel bladder under a Chinook and gets flown to a desolate mountain outpost with armed escort is not bad really.

Anyone want to guess what the biggest cost is to fight a war across the planet? Transportation of equipment and supplies. That's why many nations (including the US), simply destroy or junk millions of dollars worth of equipment, instead of bringing it back home - because it's cheaper to replace it than it is to ship halfway around the world again.

Edited by Chazman
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wars are expensive.

It's ridiculous how much money we've spent to fund our forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Think of how many highways that could fix, or how many schools and libraries that could build.

I don't think we should just pull out, but we need a more economical-friendly approach. Take out the enemy leaders, help the native people rebuild (within reason), and GTFO.

Agreed ten thousandfold.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wars are expensive.

It's ridiculous how much money we've spent to fund our forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Think of how many highways that could fix, or how many schools and libraries that could build.

I don't think we should just pull out, but we need a more economical-friendly approach. Take out the enemy leaders, help the native people rebuild (within reason), and GTFO.

War in Iraq was at least worth it for oil for greed of Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, et.al. But Afghanistan? That thing is the dump of Central Asia. It has been called the grave of superpowers since old Indian history dating 17 century BC, which was recently repeated by USSR. I do not get why Obama is so hell bent about Afghanistan. I guess he thinks he wants to change history as he did here too. But it will come at a lot of price.

Afghanistan has always been a pawn in middle Asia a region with nothing to offer and hence treated that way. Yet superpowers have advanced it to other side of the chessboard and made it the queen in their powerplay only to see it run berserk against them. The tribes never have any allegiance to any particular power. They even did not care for religion till recently as they had none. They are freelance, fiercely independent people hell bent to not to change over epochs. They love guests and go out of their reach to make the guest feel at home, but if the guest becomes their "master" they will not think twice to get that person out of their lives. If you give enough time they will even overthrow Laden if he becomes a pain in the rear to them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why can't we send electric military vehicles over there with photosensitive paint to keep them charged up?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

Loading...