“There’s a lot of money to pay for this that doesn’t have to be U.S. taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people…and on a rough recollection, the oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years…We’re dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.”
— Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz
... [A] breakdown of fuel costs, contained in Army Corps documents recently provided to Democratic Congressional investigators and shared with The New York Times, shows that Halliburton is charging $2.64 for a gallon of fuel it imports from Kuwait and $1.24 per gallon for fuel from Turkey.Tell me: can we trust Halliburton to provide much of anything, aside from fuel for controversy?... In recent weeks, the costs of importing fuel from Kuwait have risen. Figures provided recently to Congressional investigators by the corps show that Halliburton was charging as much as $3.06 per gallon for fuel from Kuwait in late November.
... Iraqi's state oil company, SOMO, pays 96 cents a gallon to bring in gas, which includes the cost of gasoline and transportation costs, the aides to [U.S. Rep. Henry] Waxman said. The gasoline transported by SOMO ? and by Halliburton's subcontractor ? are delivered to the same depots in Iraq and often use the same military escorts.
The Pentagon's Defense Energy Support Center pays $1.08 to $1.19 per gallon for the gas it imports from Kuwait, Congressional aides said. That includes the price of the gas and its transportation costs.
... In the appropriations bill signed by Mr. Bush last month, taxpayers will subsidize all gas importation costs beginning early next year."
— "High Payments to Halliburton for Fuel in Iraq," N. Y. Times, Dec. 10, 2003
Posted by Greg Greene at December 10, 2003 02:38 PM
Heh. Welcome, trolls, and have a nice day.
Meanwhile, I have some stuff on the nature of Halliburton subsidiary Brown Root' s cost plus contract that may shed some light on the pricing cited in this article. Not a 200% surcharge worth, but just the dangers of cost-plus contracts and cost allocations.
Posted by: Tim Jarrett at December 11, 2003 12:36 AM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://greenehouse.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/943