A comparison between exposure-response relationships for wind turbine annoyance and annoyance due to other noise sources

Surveys have shown that noise from wind turbines is perceived as annoying by a proportion of residents living in their vicinity, apparently at much lower noise levels than those inducing annoyance due to other environmental sources. The aim of the present study was to derive the exposure-response relationship between wind turbine noise exposure in L(den) and the expected percentage annoyed residents and to compare it to previously established relationships for industrial noise and transportation noise. In addition, the influence of several individual and situational factors was assessed. On the basis of available data from two surveys in Sweden (N=341, N=754) and one survey in the Netherlands (N=725), a relationship was derived for annoyance indoors and for annoyance outdoors at the dwelling. In comparison to other sources of environmental noise, annoyance due to wind turbine noise was found at relatively low noise exposure levels. Furthermore, annoyance was lower among residents who received economical benefit from wind turbines and higher among residents for whom the wind turbine was visible from the dwelling. Age and noise sensitivity had similar effects on annoyance to those found in research on annoyance by other sources.     

Relationship between exposure to multiple noise sources and noise annoyance

Relationships between exposure to noise [metric: day-night level (DNL) or day-evening-night level (DENL)] from a single source (aircraft, road traffic, or railways) and annoyance based on a large international dataset have been published earlier. Also for stationary sources relationships have been assessed. Here the annoyance equivalents model concerning noise annoyance from combined sources and the underlying assumptions are presented. The model first translates the noise from the individual sources into the equally annoying sound levels of a reference source, road traffic, and then sums these levels giving total level L. The annoyance from the combined sources is found by substituting exposure L in the road traffic exposure-annoyance relationship. The most important assumption, independence of the contributions of the sources, is discussed. It appears that independence will be violated substantially only due to the effect of the presence or absence of a quiet side of building which is not incorporated in the model. For use in practice the application of the model is broken down in five steps. The step by step procedure can be used for the assessment of the total noise level and the associated total annoyance on the basis of the DNL or DENL values of the individual sources.     

Industrial noise levels and annoyance in Egypt

Annoyance and increase of accident risk of workers from industrial noise levels in Egypt were studied. 683 workers from 15 Egyptian sites of industry, ranging from food to metal industry were evaluated. The goals of this study are to carry out measurements to evaluate industrial noise levels, are these levels exceeded the permissible levels set by Egyptian noise standard and policy to protect public health of workers?, to examine worker’s attitudes towards industrial noise, to know the relationship between industrial noise levels and degree of annoyance. Results showed that equivalent continuous noise levels ranged from 70 to 100 dB (A). Annoyance of respondents showed that 47.1% were highly annoyed, 5.8% their hearing were harmed. There was a strong relationship between industrial noise levels and percentage of highly annoyed respondents. By increasing industrial noise level possibility of workers to make accident was also increased. Respondents suggest less maximum daily exposure duration than those set by Egyptian law.     

Penalty for impulse noise, derived from annoyance ratings for impulse and road-traffic sounds

In the laboratory, four groups of 16 subjects rated the annoyance caused by three types of impulse sounds (regular and irregular gunfire noise and metal-construction noise) and by road-traffic sounds, all presented in background noise. The subjects were presented with the sounds for 5-min periods. The annoyance ratings were related to the A-weighted equivalent level (Leq) of the sounds. From these annoyance ratings a correction term or penalty was derived, which, added to the Leq of the impulse sounds, gives the level of equally annoying traffic noise. The correction was determined for conditions in which (1) only the annoyance caused by specific sources, or (2) the annoyance caused by the total sound (specific source plus background) had to be rated. In addition, the indoor Leq of the constantly present background noise was 35 or 55 dB(A) by and large, the results showed that for lower levels of the sounds an impulse-noise correction of at least 10 dB was required, whereas for higher levels the derived correction was about equal to the ISO/R 1996 penalty of 5 dB. This conclusion, based on the relation between Leq and annoyance ratings, is consistent with the correction based on Leq and the percentage of subjects who reported to be "very much annoyed." For equivalent levels of the impulse sounds at which 33% of the subjects claimed to be very much annoyed, the correction was 10 dB for the conditions in which the indoor Leq of the background noise was 35 dB(A), and 5 dB when this Leq was 55 dB(A).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Some developments in community response research since the second international workshop on railway and tracked transit system noise in 1978

As far as human responses to railway noise are concerned, knowledge has increased considerably since the Second International Workshop on Railway and Tracked Transit System Noise was held in Lyon, France, in October 1978. Only some developments are mentioned in this article. Concerning land use planning some evidence became available that in maintaining or recovering a certain amount of well-being the concept of noise zoning deserves most attention, and that applying heavier sound insulation measures is not sufficient in solving the problem of noise annoyance. About the influence of background noise on annoyance, data from railway noise surveys are not conclusive. Whether or not habituation to noise occurs seems to be dependent on the way it has been made operational. Neither the often used self-reported habituation nor length of residence appears to have a clear relation with annoyance. Noise from shunting yards appears to be very annoying, compared with noise from through trains, road traffic and aircraft. The characteristics of the noise causing this relatively high degree of annoyance are still subject to study. “Normal” through trains cause less annoyance than road traffic and aircraft, the noise levels being equal. Some specific disturbances, however, like for instance being disturbed while watching television or having a conversation, occur at lower noise levels with railway noise than with road traffic noise.     

Noise annoyance and activity disturbance before and after the erection of a roadside noise barrier

Questionnaire studies were conducted in a residential area before and after the erection of a 2.25 m high noise barrier of conventional type along a heavily traveled road (19,600 vehicles/24 h). The interval between studies was two years. Houses closest to the barrier received a sound-level reduction from -70.0 to 62.5 dB Lden at the most exposed facade. The sound-level reduction decreased with distance to the road, and was negligible for houses at more than 100 m distance. Up to this distance, the noise barrier reduced residents' noise annoyance outdoors and indoors as well as improved speech communication outdoors. Indoors, speech communication and sleep disturbance were slightly but nonsignificantly improved. Predictions of the number of annoyed persons from published exposure-response curves (in Lden) agreed with the percentage of residents being annoyed when indoors, before and after the barrier. Conversely, the percentage of residents being annoyed when outdoors clearly exceeded the predictions. These results suggest that these exposure-response curves may be used in predicting indoor situations, but they should not be applied in situations where outdoor annoyance is at focus.     

A new indicator to measure the noise impact around airports: The Real Estate Tolerance Level (RETL) – Case study around Charles de Gaulle Airport

The Community Tolerance Level (CTL) is a new indicator which characterizes the impact of aircraft noise around local airport. It corresponds to the exposure sound level (DENL or DNL) where 50% of the population is highly annoyed. Inspired by this indicator, this paper aims at calculating the Real Estate Tolerance Level (RETL) which corresponds to the exposure sound level where a property price is 50% depreciated compared to the price of the same property which would be situated in an area whose DENL is below 50 dB(A). The use of a notarial database analyzed with the Hedonic Price Model (HPM) made it possible to calculate the percentage of property price depreciation around CDG airport, with 1-dB steps of DENL, and so far to calculate the RETL. 19,891 house transactions and 23,264 apartments have been localized with a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and crossed with the Sound Environment Curves provided by Airport of Paris. The RETL value for single houses and for apartments around CDG is 75.8 dB. It is comparable to the mean CTL value which has been estimated to 73.3 dB from the DNL data of 43 airports over the world (about 73.9 dB from DENL data). The RETL is predictable without field survey and could characterize the impact of aircraft noise around local airports. It could be a good indicator to follow the evolution of population tolerance over the years.     

The relationship between civil aircraft noise and community annoyance in Korea

Studies of community annoyance caused by civil aircraft noise exposure were carried out in 18 areas around Gimpo and Gimhae international airports in order to accumulate social survey data and assess the relationship between aircraft noise levels and annoyance responses in Korea. WECPNL, adopted as the aircraft noise index in Korea, and the percentage of respondents who felt highly annoyed (%HA) have been used to assess the dose-response of aircraft noise. Aircraft noise levels were measured automatically by airport noise monitoring system, B&K type 3597. Social surveys were carried out to people living within 100 m of noise measurement points. The Questionnaire used in the survey contained demographic factors, noise annoyance, interference with daily activities and health-related symptoms. The question relating to the aircraft noise annoyance was answered on an 11-point numerical scale. The randomly selected respondents who were aged between 18 and 70 years completed the questionnaire by themselves. In total, 705 respondents participated in the questionnaire. The results show that WECPNL, noise metric considering characteristics of event and intrusive noise, is more reasonable than L_dn, noise metric considering total sound, to assess the effects of aircraft noise on health. It is also shown that the annoyance responses caused by aircraft noise in Korea seems higher than those reported in other countries.     

A theory of patterns of passby noise

Some people say they are annoyed by traffic noise. There is rather a lot of evidence to show that where traffic noise is louder, more people say they are annoyed by it. On the basis of this sort of evidence, there is a consensus that road traffic noise causes annoyance, but some studies have detected unexplained peaks of annoyance in quieter places, or a plateau of annoyance in high noise. Such anomalies may especially affect those sensitive to noise. The pattern of alternation of passby noise and background traffic noise explains the positioning in soundspace of anomalies variously reported at 60 dB(A) L_eq, 4000 NV and 1800 NHV. Such anomalies occur where there are regular or rapidly alternating patterns of passby noise.     

Community responses to road traffic noise in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City

Vietnam is a developing country in southeast Asia, and its environment has been seriously affected by industrialization and urbanization. In large cities like Hanoi (northern Vietnam) and Ho Chi Minh City (southern Vietnam), noise emission from road traffic has been found to be a serious concern among general public. In 2005 and 2007, two large-scale socio-acoustic surveys of community response to road traffic noise were conducted to investigate human reactions to road traffic noise in these cities; the sample sizes were 1503 people in Hanoi and 1471 in Ho Chi Minh City. The noise exposure levels (L_den) were 70–83 dB in Hanoi and 75–83 dB in Ho Chi Minh City. Noise annoyance was estimated using standardized annoyance scales. For both cities, dose–response relationships were established between L_den and the percentage of highly annoyed respondents. Compared to annoyance responses of European people, Vietnamese were less annoyed by road traffic noise by about 5 dB. Hanoi respondents seemed to be more annoyed by noise than Ho Chi Minh City respondents. Conversation and sleep disturbances were not as serious as expected in either city. Furthermore, window orientation in the home was found to affect activity disturbances.     

Trends in aircraft noise annoyance: the role of study and sample characteristics

Recently, it has been suggested that the annoyance of residents at a given aircraft noise exposure level increases over the years. The objective of the present study was to verify the hypothesized trend and to identify its possible causes. To this end, the large database used to establish earlier exposure-response relationships on aircraft noise was updated with original data from several recent surveys, yielding a database with data from 34 separate airports. Multilevel grouped regression was used to determine the annoyance response per airport, after which meta-regression was used to investigate whether study characteristics could explain the heterogeneity in annoyance response between airports. A significant increase over the years was observed in annoyance at a given level of aircraft noise exposure. Furthermore, the type of annoyance scale, the type of contact, and the response percentage were found to be sources of heterogeneity. Of these, only the scale factor could statistically account for the trend, although other findings rule it out as a satisfactory explanation. No evidence was found for increased self-reported noise sensitivity. The results are of importance to the applicability of current exposure-annoyance relationships for aircraft noise and provide a basis for decisions on whether these need to be updated.     

Annoyance with aircraft noise in local recreational areas and the recreationists' noise situation at home

Few socioacoustic studies have examined the effect of noise on outdoor recreationists. Most studies concentrate on one setting of the everyday life of a noise-exposed population, which mainly has been the residential setting. This article relates annoyance with aircraft noise in outdoor recreational areas to the recreationists' noise situation at home. In conjunction with the relocation of the main airport of Norway in 1998, field studies were conducted before and after the change in one area near the old airport (1930 survey respondents), and one area near the new airport (1001 survey respondents). Multivariate linear regression analyses of the relationship between annoyance and aircraft noise exposure (LAeq for the aircraft events) in the recreational areas were conducted, controlled for noise annoyance at home, or aircraft noise exposure at home, the situation (before/ after the change), context- and demographic variables. People more highly annoyed at home tended to be more annoyed than others while in the recreational areas. A significant effect of aircraft noise exposure at home on annoyance in the recreational setting was not found. More research is warranted regarding the relationship between noise exposure at home and outdoor recreational demands.     

环境噪声对儿童短时记忆力和注意力的影响

通过实验室研究探讨了不同噪声源在不同声压级条件下对儿童短时记忆力和注意力的影响。在每一个实验中都选取了30名710岁的儿童作为被试,在他们完成相应认知任务的同时,用耳机随机播放3565 dBA的交通噪声、白噪声和空调噪声,考察各种噪声条件对被试认知成绩和主观烦恼度的影响。研究结果表明,噪声对儿童的影响主要体现在主观烦恼度的变化上,不同的噪声条件并没有引起作业成绩的显著差异。影响儿童主观烦恼度的主要因素是声压级,随着声压级的增大,儿童的烦恼度会增加,当声压级在4550 dBA时,儿童对噪声开始产生烦恼感,当声压级在6065 dBA时,儿童对噪声产生了较显著的烦恼感。声压级对儿童烦恼度的影响没有随着噪声源的改变而改变。在相同的噪声条件下,短时记忆力实验中儿童的主观烦恼度都高于注意力实验,说明随着认知过程复杂程度的增加,噪声引起的烦恼度会相应增加。      

Investigation of the dose-response relationship for road traffic noise in Assiut, Egypt

A field study has been carried out in urban Assiut city, Egypt. The goals of this study are: (1) to carry out measurements to evaluate road traffic noise levels, (2) to determine if these levels exceeds permissible levels, (3) to examine people’s attitudes towards road traffic noise, (4) to ascertain the relationship between road traffic noise levels and degree of annoyance. The measurements indicate that traffic noise noise levels are higher than those set by Egyptian noise standards and policy to protect public health and welfare in residential areas: equivalent continuous A - weighted sound pressure levels (L_A eq) = 80 dB and higher were recorded, while maximum permissible level is 65 dB. There is a strong relationship between road traffic noise levels and percentage of highly annoyed respondents. Higher road traffic noise levels mean that the percentage of respondents who feel highly annoyed is also increased.     

Annoyance due to single and combined sound exposure from railway and road traffic

Environmental noise is a growing and well recognized health problem. However, in many cases people are exposed not to a single noise source-for example, road, railway, or aircraft noise-but to a combination of noise exposures and there is only limited knowledge of the effects on health of exposure to combined noise sources. A socio-acoustic survey among 1953 persons aged 18-75 years was conducted in residential areas exposed to railway and road traffic noise with sound levels ranging from L(Aeq,24h) 45-72 dB in a municipality east of Gothenburg, Sweden. The objectives were to assess various adverse health effects, including annoyance, and to elucidate the impact of exposure to single and combined noise sources. In areas exposed to both railway and road traffic, the proportion annoyed by the total traffic sound environment (total annoyance) was significantly higher than in areas with one dominant noise source (rail or road traffic) with the same total sound exposure (L(Aeq,24h,tot)). This interaction effect was significant from 59 dB and increased gradually with higher sound levels. Effects of the total sound exposure should be considered in risk assessments and in noise mitigation activities.     

Community reaction to aircraft noise: time-of-day penalty and tradeoff between levels of overflights

A decrease in the level of sound events can compensate for an increase in the level of other events, but noise metrics assume different tradeoffs. Noise metrics also differ in the penalty applied to noise in the evening and to noise in the night, and in the definition of these periods. These two aspects of noise metrics, i.e., the tradeoff and the penalty for the nighttime (23-7h), are investigated. A general model of the relation between SELs of sound events (aircraft overflights) and noise annoyance is presented which allows for a wide range of tradeoffs and time-of-day penalties. The (tradeoff and time-of-day penalty) parameters of the model are fitted to the data from an aircraft noise study conducted around Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, which is especially suited for investigating the tradeoff and time-of-day penalties. It was found that in this study the tradeoff between the levels of events in metrics based on L(Aeq)'s, such as L(Aeq)(24 h), DNL, and DENL, is approximately correct for the prediction of noise annoyance. Furthermore, it was found that the strongest correlation with annoyance is obtained with a nighttime penalty of circa 10 dB. No suitable data were available for further tests of the tradeoff. The result with respect to the nighttime penalty was weakly further supported by the outcome of analyses of the original data from four other aircraft noise surveys (one survey conducted around British airports, and three coordinated surveys carried out around Paris Orly, Amsterdam Schiphol, and Glasgow Abbotsinch).     

Annoyance and disturbance of daily activities from road traffic noise in Canada

This study evaluated road traffic noise annoyance in Canada in relation to activity interference, subject concerns about noise and self-reported distance to a major road. Random digit dialing was employed to survey a representative sample of 2565 Canadians 15 years of age and older. Respondents highly annoyed by traffic noise were significantly more likely to perceive annoyance to negatively impact health, live closer to a heavily traveled road and report that traffic noise often interfered with daily activities. Sex, age, education level, community size and province had statistically significant associations with traffic noise annoyance. High noise annoyance consistently correlated with frequent interference of activities. Reducing noise at night (10 pm-7 am) was more important than during the rest of the day.     

The response to railway noise in residential areas in Great Britain

The effects of railway noise on residents have been measured with a combined social survey (1453 respondents) and noise measurement survey (over 2000 noise measurements) at 403 locations in 75 study areas in Great Britain. In the analysis of the data methods have been used which take into account many typical noise survey problems including noise measurement errors, unique locality effects and the weakness of the noise annoyance relationship. Railway noise bothers 2% of the nation's population. Approximately 170 000 people live where railway noise levels are above 65 dB(A) 24 hour L_eq. Annoyance increases steadily with noise level; thus there is no particular “acceptable” noise level. Railway noise is less annoying than aircraft or road traffic noise of equivalent noise level, at least above 50 to 65L_eq. Noise is rated as the most serious environmental nuisance caused by railways. Maintenance noise is rated as a bigger problem than passing train noise. Vibration is the most important non-noise problem. Reactions to vibrations are related to distance from route, train speed and number of trains. The railway survey's highly stratified, probability sample design with many study areas makes it possible to evaluate the effects of area characteristics on reactions. The 24 h L_eq dB(A) noise index is more closely related to annoyance than are other accepted noise indices examined. There is no support for ambient noise level or night-time corrections. Thirteen railway operation characteristics were examined. One, the type of traction, has a strong effect on reactions after controlling for L_eq (overhead electrified routes are the equivalent of about 10 dB less annoying at high noise levels). Three indicators of railway ancillary noises and non-noise environmental nuisances affect annoyance but most operational characteristics have no effect. The effects of over 35 demographic, attitudinal and neighbourhood characteristics on annoyance are examined. Though most objective characteristics of neighbourhoods and respondents are not correlated with annoyance, three do decrease annoyance (older dwellings, older respondents, and life-time residence). The attitudes which affect annoyance with railway noise are not general ones about railways as transportation sources, but rather ones which are specific to the neighbourhood setting or to railways as environmental intrusions in the neighbourhood. Such attitudes often have less effect on annoyance at low noise levels. In such cases it is the reactions of the more annoyed types of people which are most closely related to noise level.