Highlights of costs of war research

Major findings from the "Costs of War" study on the financial and human costs of US wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan since 2001 by the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University.










FINANCIAL TOLL:

* Congressional war appropriations to Pentagon since 2001: $1.3 trillion

* Additions to Pentagon base budget: $362 billion to $652 billion

* Interest on Pentagon war appropriations: $185 billion

* Veterans' medical claims and disability: $33 billion

* War-related international aid: $74 billion

* Additions to Homeland Security base spending: $401 billion

* Projected obligations for veterans care to 2050: $589 billion to $934 billion

* Social costs to veterans and military families to date: $295 billion to $400 billion

Future spending requests:

* 2012 Pentagon war spending: $118 billion

* 2012 foreign aid: $12 billion

* 2013-2015 projected war spending: $168 billion

* 2016-2020 projected war spending: $155 billion

ESTIMATED TOTAL: $3.7 trillion to $4.4 trillion

ADDITIONAL interest payments to 2020: $1 trillion

CONSERVATIVE DEATH TOLL ESTIMATES BY WAR ZONE:

Afghanistan: 33,877

Iraq: 151,471

Pakistan: 39,127

CONSERVATIVE DEATH TOLL ESTIMATES BY CATEGORY:

US military: 6,051

US contractors: 2,300

Iraqi security forces: 9,922

Afghan security forces: 8,756

Pakistani security forces: 3,520

Other allied troops: 1,192

Afghan civilians: 11,700

Iraqi civilians: 125,000

Pakistani civilians and insurgents: 35,600

Afghan insurgents: 10,000

Iraqi army during US invasion: 10,000

Journalists and media workers: 168

Humanitarian workers: 266

TOTAL: 224,475

Read More

Gas drilling might disappoint investors: NYT

While gas companies like ConocoPhillips and Chesapeake Energy Corporation are making big bets on wells to extract energy from shale formations, industry insiders have doubts that the companies will be able to deliver on their promises to investors.
which prepared a report based on an investigation of e-mails and documents, energy executive, industry lawyers, state geologists and market scepticism question whether natural gas companies are exaggerating how productive their wells will be.

 it researched well data and found that many of them are surrounded by less-productive zones that cost more to drill and operate than the resulting gas is worth.

The newspaper said its investigation found that in many of the wells, the amount of gas produced is falling faster than the companies had expected.

None of the e-mails explicitly accuse any companies of breaking the law.

Chesapeake could not be reached for comment.

ConocoPhillips, which on June 16 signed a deal with the Bangladesh government over exploration in the Bay of Bengal despite protests from citizen quarters, declined to comment on the issue.

The energy giant will start its seismic survey by December in deep sea blocks 10 and 11, an area of 5158 square kilometres. The depth of water is between 1,000 and 1,500 metres and the blocks are about 280 kilometres away from the Chittagong port.

The firm under its mandatory work programme must initiate seismic survey in a grid of 10km by 10km space over the whole of the blocks.

The Texas-based company has pledged $160 million bank guarantee for working in three phases and the contract period is nine years.

The oil giant won blocks 10 and 11 in 2008 in the second-round bidding for the production sharing contract (PSC), but could not sign the PSC with state-run Bangladesh Oil, Gas and Mineral Corporation, or Petrobangla, as parts of these blocks were also claimed by neighbouring India and Myanmar.

The country is divided into 52 blocks, 28 of which are in the Bay.

Experts say ConocoPhillips will have the authority to export 80 percent of gas, and Petrobangla will get the rest, which will have to be carried to the shore at its own cost — not an economically viable proposition for Bangladesh, in any case.

Read More