Final project for class HONR 204 at Loyola University Chicago, Fall 2010 with Professor George K. Thiruvathukal

1. Eric Williamson Loyola university chicago HONR 204 fall 2010 George k. thiruvathukal, prof. The Effects of a Possible Terrorist Attack on Chicago and the Role of Crowds

2. 24

3. Terrorism Defined The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes. The state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. (1) Currently, there is no agreed upon legal definition of terrorism. What is the difference between a liberation movement and a terrorist movement? The issue of state terrorism and national militaries (2)

4. September 11th, 2001 Brought the issue of terrorism home, to the forefront of our lives. We learned new phrases like “weapons of mass destruction,” and “enhanced interrogation.” (3) This language is used to “foster a culture of fear.” New phrases “divorce language from meaning.” Changed the way we live our lives. Made us more aware, or paranoid as some might call it. Amanda’s Story

5. Post 9/11 Like Amanda, we all have seen changes and become more aware of our surroundings. CTA signs: “Stylish or Suspicious?” Operation Iraqi Freedom, Hunting Sadam and Osama TSA’s “upgrades.” We are on high alert for future attacks.

6. Terrorist Weapons – Chemical Agents http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/agentlistchem.asp List of Chemical Agents

7. Terrorist Weapons – Biological Agents http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/agentlist.asp List of Biological Agents

8. Terrorist Weapons – Dirty Bombs A dirty bomb consists of conventional explosives combined with radioactive material and is intended to contaminate the area around it. (4) FAS study determined that potential dirty bomb attacks constitute a serious threat, and radiological materials are accessible to “determined” terrorists. (5) FAS ran three probable case studies. http://www.fas.org/faspir/2002/v55n2/dirtybomb.htm

9. Terrorist Weapons – Nuclear Bombs The scariest possibility As more and more countries develop nuclear programs, terrorists are more likely to obtain nuclear weapons (6). The most likely scenario is that terrorist groups would take advantage of the lack of shipping security, and set off a nuclear bomb at an important shipping harbor, such as Long Beach, CA (7). http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/2006/RAND_TR391.pdf Terrorists conceal a 10-kilton bomb in a shipping container (20,000 containers daily—security is difficult), and it subsequently explodes. The immediate blast destroys everything in a 0.6 mile radius Flash electromagnetic radiation kills everybody in a 0.7 mile radius. The Radioactive fallout would contaminate an area of hundreds of square kilometers, making this area uninhabitable for years. Radioactive water and sediment expose 150,000 people to radiation. Approximately 60,000 people will die immediately from the blast and following flash radiation.

10. Long Beach Attack Cont’d. 72 Hours After the Attack Economic Implications Political Implications Economic Implications Costs in excess of $1 trillion. US Federal Debt: almost $14 trillion Trade: Strategic Gaming Immediate call to all ports to receive all traffic from Long Beach, though there is a high likelyhood that they too will close (cancellation of air traffic immediately after 9/11) The ports of California handle 30% of US shipping imports. If they were closed, this would lead to severe consequences for domestic businesses and would lead to extremely decreased availability of basic goods. Declines in world stock markets. Bankruptcies, mortage defaults

11. Possible Attack Scenarios on Chicago Terrorists would target the areas with the highest crowd densities—namely malls, CTA, crowded streets like Michigan Ave. Use biological/chemical weapons. Dirty bombs Worst case scenario: a 10 kiloton bomb like the one from the hypothetical Long Beach scenario is detonated in downtown Chicago. Response scenarios

12. First Scenario: A biological/chemical weapon is deployed on a CTA railcar CTA Red Line at 7:30 Thursday morning Belmont 45 42 Fullerton 38 28 North/Clybourne 12 37 Clark/Divison 53 35 Chicago 20 36 Grand 35 40 Lake 65

13. First Attack Scenario Cont’d. Terrorists would most likely use an aerosol dispersal device such as a pressurized glass container to spread anthrax or another biological/chemical agent. (8) (9) Dangers with biological weapons: symptoms do not necessarily appear immediately. Probable weapons: anthrax, sarin, VX (10)

14. First Attack Scenario Cont’d. Chemical Agent Sarin released via aerosol dispersal device. Sarin is odorless, tasteless, and clear when vaporized Train travelling from Grand to Lake Thursday morning 40 people on the train, 65 waiting at Lake Immediate symptoms of Sarin exposure (light) Confusion, drowsiness, eye pain, blurred vision, cough, headache, abdominal pain Immediate symptoms of Sarin exposure (heavy) Loss of consciousness, paralysis, respiratory failure leading to death.

15. First Attack Scenario Cont’d. Serin gas stays on clothing for up to 30 minutes, increasing the spread of the weapon. Sketchup Model/Netlogo Conservative Estimates 20-30 died from heavy serin exposure 100+ showed symptoms from light serin exposure and are hospitalized Other possible agents usable in this senario: VX, mustard gas, chlorine gas Biological agents: anthrax, ricin Response: Shut down CTA, evacuate Lake, set up biological decontamination tents and emergency hospital units

16. Second Attack Scenario: An IED/pipebomb explodes on a CTA railcar A pipe bomb consists of a tightly sealed steel pipe filled with explosives, most likely a mixture between nitrogenous fertilizer and a “low-explosive” such as black gunpowder. (12) 8090 psi explosion. Standard atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi Conservative estimates 30-35 dead; others injured from shrapnel All on train suffer hearing damage CTA car destroyed, part of platform destroyed Other possibilities: Dirty bomb Response scenario: Shut down CTA, evacuate Lake. Transport injured to the hospital

17. Third Attack Scenario: A Chemical Attack on Watertower Place Average crowd density of about 5 people/sq. yard (Saturday afternoon) At least 600 people on the first 3 floors Vents Using aerosol dispersal devices Large quantities of Serin gas Assume that about 50-100 people are able to get out with only symptoms of light serin exposure

18. Third Attack Scenario Cont’d. The rest experience symptoms of heavy serin exposure—loss of consciousness, paralysis, respiratory failure leading to death. At least 200 dead; 300+ injured Response scenario: Quarantine the building and those who evacuated immediately after the attack, set up emergency treatment tents and decontamination Other possible scenario: dirty bomb, pipe bomb

19. Fourth (and scariest) Attack Scenario: A Nuclear Bomb Explodes in Downtown Chicago Highly unlikely Terrorists must overcome “enormous technical and logistical obstacles” in order to assemble a nuclear bomb in a city. (13) Though, terrorists theoretically could “steal, produce, or procure a ‘crude’ bomb or device.” Assume the same bomb from Long Beach example; set off in the early afternoon 10 kiloton .6 mile blast radius .7 flash burst radius (lethal doses of radiation) Fallout: 100’s of square kilometers

20. Fourth Attack Scenario Cont’d. Effects Blast radius covers the entire loop plus some—at least 100,000 dead (loop population 2000: about 17,000) (14) Massive infrastructure damage Flash radiation radius: about 15,000 more fatalities Thousands temporarily blinded, leading to car accidents Fallout after 24 hours: about 10 miles in a given direction, depending on wind patterns. Thousands more will get radiation sickness, depending on whether or not effective evacuations are implemented. Neighboring cities must be prepared to receive massive amounts of refugees. Economic Costs will be in the trillions Homes lost Life insurance benefits Worker’s compensation claims Infrastructure damage Commercial square footage lost Stock Market collapse Political Relations with other countries Another war?

21. Conclusion Be aware, but not paranoid

22. Works Cited - MLA (1) "terrorism." Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 19 Nov. 2010. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism>. (2) Deen, Thalif. "U.N. Member States Struggle to Define Terroism." IPS News 20 Nov. 2010. 25 July 2005 <http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=29633>. (3) Lehrer, Espada et. al., . "Seven Years Later, Impact of 9/11 Still Resonates." PBS Newshour. 28 Nov. 2010. PBS. 11 Sep. 2008 <http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/july-dec08/911discussion_09-11.html>. (4) "Dirty Bomb." Wikipedia. 28 Nov. 2010. Wikipedia. 23 Nov. 2010 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_bomb#cite_ref-Petroff_2007_3-0>. (5) "Dirty Bombs: Response to a Threat." FAS Public Interest Report. 28 Nov. 2010. The Journal of the Federation of American Scientists. March/April 2002 <http://www.fas.org/faspir/2002/v55n2/dirtybomb.htm>. (6) Levi, Rubenstein, . "How Likely is a Nuclear Terrorist Attack on the United States?." Council on Foreign Relations. 29 Nov. 2010. Council on Foreign Relations. 20 Apr. 2007 <http://www.cfr.org/publication/13097/how_likely_is_a_nuclear_terrorist_attack_on_the_united_states.html>. (7) Meade, Molander, . "Considering the Effects of a Catastrophic Terrorist Attack." Center for Terrorism Risk Management Policy. 29 Nov. 2010. RAND. 2006 <http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/2006/RAND_TR391.pdf>. (8) "Biological Warfare Agent Delivery." GlobalSecurity.org. 29 Nov. 2010. GlobalSecurity.org. 23 Oct. 2007 <http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/intro/bio_delivery.htm>. (9) "Biological Weapons." GlobalSecurity.org. 29 Nov. 2010. GlobalSecurity.org. 23 Oct. 2007 <http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/intro/bio_intro.htm>. (10) "Chemical Agents." Emergency Preparedness and Response. 30 Nov. 2010. Center for Disease Control. <http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/agentlistchem.asp>. (11) "Facts About Sarin." Emergency Preparedness and Response. 30 Nov. 2010. Center for Disease Control. <http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/sarin/basics/facts.asp>. (12) "Pipe Bomb." Wikipedia. 30 Nov. 2010. Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. 15 Nov. 2010 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipe_bomb>. (13) John, Mueller. "The Atomic Terrorist: Assessing the Likelihood." Department of Political Science. 30 Nov. 2010. Ohio State University. 1 Jan. 2008 <http://polisci.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller/APSACHGO.PDF>. (14) “Loop, Chicago." Wikipedia. 30 Nov. 2010. Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. 25 Nov. 2010 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Loop#Population >.