Transportation Noise

Chicago to install noise monitors along Lake Shore Drive

 

Photo credit: Roman Boed licensed under CC BY 2.0

A new Illinois law is taking on noisy vehicles along Lake Shore Drive. Gov. Bruce Rauner signed HB2361 into law on Tuesday, August 24th, which “allows the city of Chicago to install noise monitors along the scenic expressway to study the impact of vehicular noise.” The bill’s sponsor, Illinois Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, says that the “law creates a first step in remediating the ambient noise problem along Lake Shore Drive.” Feigenholtz proposed the bill because she wanted empirical–not anecdotal–evidence about the noise coming from the drive. The city of Chicago may now enact an ordinance providing for the monitoring, which is “similar in concept to the monitoring system used to measure jet noise around O’Hare International Airport.”

This is an exciting first step for a U.S. city, and something that London is doing this in its draft London Environmental Strategy, which strongly addresses the problems of highway noise. Chicago can take the lead among American cities in monitoring and controlling road traffic noise.

 

 

 

 

Will electric vehicles reduce city traffic noise?

Photo credit: G.M. Briggs

By Daniel Fink, MD, Chair, The Quiet Coalition

Some people put great hope in technology to solve problems of modern living. So it is with those who think that electric vehicles, whether trucks or other vehicles, will do the trick. I’m in favor of electric and hybrid vehicles for their beneficial effects in reducing the use of petroleum products and reducing gaseous and particulate emissions. Anything reducing diesel use will have a dramatic benefit in reducing particulate matter. So news that Ryder, “one of the nation’s largest medium-duty truck fleet management companies, will buy trucks from Chanje [an electric truck manufacturer], then lease and service them through its extensive network,” is welcome. But will electric vehicles reduce city traffic noise? I think not.

First, it will take years if not decades for electric vehicles to become more common. Second, and perhaps more importantly, power train noise is a small component of road traffic noise in most situations. I suppose a diesel hybrid vehicle idling on electric will be quieter than the same vehicle powered solely by a diesel engine, but adequate insulation of the engine compartment and an effective muffler system would do the trick just as well.

And of course, electric vehicles won’t do anything about horns, horn-based alerts, or sirens.

The technologies to reduce or control noise have been known for decades. Acoustics pioneer Leo Beranek published his landmark book, “Noise Reduction,” in 1960 and the successor, “Noise and Vibration Control,” in 1971. As noise pioneer Arline Bronzaft, PhD, has written, what is lacking is not the way but the political will.

Road traffic noise is a health and public health hazard, causing non-auditory health impacts like hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and death. The European literature makes this very clear. There is no reason to think that Americans, largely of European descent and those from elsewhere, have different physiological responses to noise exposure.

If enough people loudly demand that their elected officials pass and enforce laws to make vehicles and streets quieter, our cities and their streets will become quieter. Electric vehicles may or may not play a small role in this, but they are largely irrelevant.

Dr. Daniel Fink is a leading noise activist based in the Los Angeles area. He serves on the board of the American Tinnitus Association, is the interim chair of Quiet Communities’s Health Advisory Council, and is the founding chair of The Quiet Coalition, an organization of science, health, and legal professionals concerned about the impacts of noise on health, environment, learning, productivity, and quality of life in America.

Will electric vehicles contribute significantly to a quieter world?

Photo credit: cytech licensed under CC BY 2.0

Jeanine Botta, of Silence the Horns, expresses some doubts in her post, “Marketing quiet while adding to noise pollution.” Botta writes about a recent post on Huffington Post that discusses the health effects of traffic noise.  She notes that the piece, which “tells us that ‘EVs are bringing the quiet’ and concludes that ‘…you could say we’re about to enter a golden age of silence,'” was promoted by Nissan, with “Brought to you by ELECTRIFY THE WORLD – A NISSAN INTELLIGENT MOBILITY INITIATIVE” appearing next to the Huffington Post banner.  “Welcome to the world of advertorial marketing,” she says. 

What follows is Botta’s thoughtful analysis of why electric cars may not be “bringing the quiet” any time soon.  More importantly, if concern about vehicle noise is more than a marketing ploy, manufacturers should look at Botta’s suggestions on how they can “substantially reduce vehicle noise pollution” right now in both electric vehicles and in internal combustion engine cars by simply phasing out audible alarms and signals.

Click the first link above to read Botta’s entire piece.  It is well worth your time.

Quiet race cars? Yes! “Formula E racing” is a hot new world sport

Photo credit: Smokeonthewater licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0

By David Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

Race cars are supposed to be LOUD right? I grew up fascinated by Formula 1, Grand Prix racing and the incredibly loud Indy 500—all of which necessitated the use of hearing protection. But no more. In 2014, a new class of all-electric race cars called “Formula E” emerged and began racing in various venues around the world. France, of course, now holds an annual “ePrix,” and Los Angeles was the first city in the U.S. to host a Formula E race. But on July 16th of this year, Brooklyn hosted an exciting one.

If you’re a car nut like me, who’s also concerned about air and noise pollution, this is the sport for you!

Here’s a list of Formula E events in 2017 and the schedule of races in 2018.

Enjoy!

David Sykes chairs/co-chairs four national professional groups in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, ANSI S12 WG44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group. He is also a board member of the American Tinnitus Association, co-founder of the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), and a contributor to “Technology for a Quieter America” (2011, National Academy of Engineering). A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

Swiss study confirms transportation noise causes health problems

Daniel Fink, MD, Chair, The Quiet Coalition

It is well-known in Europe that transportation noise causes adverse health effects, including sleep loss, diabetes, hypertension, obesity, cardiovascular disease, and death. The World Health Organization’s European Office published a monograph on the burden of disease from noise, and the European Noise Directive lays out a government plan to deal with the problem. Studies in the UK, Germany, the Netherlands, and other countries have consistently shown this, most often with a relationship between greater noise exposure and worse health outcomes.

At the 12th Congress of the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Noise (ICBEN) meeting in Zürich in June–the world’s largest meeting on the health effects of noise–Swiss researchers presented the results of a study done in their country. The results are from an integrated research approach dubbed SiRENE (the acronym roughly translates to Short and Long Term Effects of Transportation Noise Exposure) looking at noise exposure, sleep patterns, clinical testing for sleep disorders and glucose metabolism, mathematical modeling of noise exposure for the Swiss population, and determination of noise-induced health risks for the Swiss population. The study is ongoing, but interim reports at ICBEN were consistent with reports from other countries: transportation noise exposure caused cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, and increased the risk of dying from a heart attack by 4% for each 10 decibel increase in road noise at home.

We are certain transportation noise has the same adverse health effects on Americans even if the research here is limited. Perhaps the best-known American study of the effect of transportation noise on health was done by Correia et al, looking at hospital admissions in the Medicare population in people living near airports. That study was limited in its scope and methods, but not surprisingly, transportation noise exposure increased hospital admissions here, too.

Dr. Daniel Fink is a leading noise activist based in the Los Angeles area. He serves on the board of the American Tinnitus Association, is the interim chair of Quiet Communities’s Health Advisory Council, and is the founding chair of The Quiet Coalition, an organization of science, health, and legal professionals concerned about the impacts of noise on health, environment, learning, productivity, and quality of life in America.

Supreme Court on airport noise: “Go away!”

By David Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition (with contributions by Jamie L. Banks, Jeanne Kempthorne and Gina M. Briggs)

The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear the airport noise case brought by the town of East Hampton, Long Island (of The Hamptons in New York).
This is an important case that The Quiet Coalition wrote about back in January and March.  This case is significant as it addresses an important issue of public health, because noise not only causes hearing problems, it also contributes to heart disease and other conditions.

There are 15,000 airports in the USA, 5200 of which have paved runways, and 376 have regularly scheduled flights. That’s a lot of neighborhoods and people exposed to the pollution and noise from take-offs and landings! Perhaps now that the Supreme Court has denied their petition for a writ of certiorari (i.e., seeking review of a lower court decision), the East Hampton group will join the 36 communities in the National Quiet Skies Coalition and press their congressional representatives to join the Congressional Quiet Skies Caucus. The Caucus has already petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and submitted a bill to Congress. But it’s going to take many more communities joining the battle to win this one.

Many people around the U.S.—on both sides of the airport noise problem—were watching to see what the Supreme Court would do. What the Court did was let the Second Circuit Court decision stand. That decision had invalidated the town’s restrictions on flights to and from the East Hampton Airport—which the town owns–after finding that the town did not have the right to impose the restrictions owing to a 1990 federal law that “limits the town’s authority to impose rules at the airport.”  NOTE: The FAA’s argument relied on federal preemption, and, in particular, the Town’s failure to comply with the procedural requirements of the federal Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990. The Second Circuit held that the Act applied even though the Town was had forgone federal funding for the airport.

Many locals were unhappy, with one telling the New York Times:

“The Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case was ‘indicative of the fact that when it comes to our own airport, we don’t have local control,’ said Barry Raebeck…. ‘It strikes me as decidedly unjust, as un-American. This is what we’re all about, local control. We have federal agencies dictating. I consider the F.A.A. a lobbying group for airport operators. You don’t have any rights unless you’re in an airplane in their minds.’”

Is this the end of the matter? No. But getting a case to the Supreme Court is a long, time-consuming, and expensive process. We congratulate those who have been waging this battle so far and urge them: PLEASE TAKE THE NEXT STEP! We’re reminded of Theodore Roosevelt who said:

“…Credit belongs to the [people] who are actually in the arena…who err and come up short…who spend [themselves] for a worthy cause; who…know the triumph of high achievement, and who, if they fail, fail while daring greatly; [their] place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.”

We believe the key to winning the airport noise battle—indeed all battles about noise in America—is to challenge the FAA’s (and its parent, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s) long-held and politically convenient view that noise is “merely annoyance” with no appreciable effects on health or well-being. This is unfounded. In fact, the adverse health effects of noise are strongly supported by decades of authoritative evidence from medical and public health professionals. The use of the term “annoyance” is a shibboleth; that is, a term used to characterize the problem that is fundamentally wrong.

Noise control advocates now need to re-focus their efforts on the public health effects of noise—for which solid scientific evidence exists and continues to grow–and go back to court with new arguments until this battle is won.

David Sykes chairs/co-chairs four national professional groups in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, ANSI S12 WG44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group. He is also a board member of the American Tinnitus Association, co-founder of the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), and a contributor to “Technology for a Quieter America” (2011, National Academy of Engineering). A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

Study: Noise and air pollution adversely affect heart health

Photo credit: G.M. Briggs

CTV News reports that a new European study has found that exposure to excessive traffic noise is linked to a higher risk of heart disease. What makes this study particularly interesting, is that “[a]lthough air pollution has already been linked to an increased risk of heart disease, stroke, asthma, and risk of death, and noise pollution linked to raised blood pressure, disturbed sleep, and an increase in stress hormones, until now little research has been carried out on the effects of noise pollution and air pollution — which are often found together — on health.”

For purposes of the study, “noise pollution” was defined as “noise louder than conversation level — around 60 decibels (dB).”  To determine the effect of noise pollution on health, “the researchers tested the participants’ blood for a range of biological markers that could indicate heart disease…and blood sugar levels, which are linked to heart disease, diabetes and stroke at higher levels.” After taking into account lifestyle factors (age, sex, smoking habits, etc.), the researchers found “an increase of just 5dB in noise levels was linked to 0.3% higher blood sugar levels than those living in quieter neighborhoods.”

But the bad news about noise pollution doesn’t end there. The researchers “also believe noise could be increasing the risk of heart disease by causing long-term psychological stress due to lack of sleep and an increase in the production of stress hormones.”

The results should not be entirely surprising. Anna Hansell, one of the authors of the new study, was the lead author on a study linking noise to adverse health effects in BMJ in 2013, and a senior author on another study  linking road traffic noise and cardiovascular morbidity, in 2015.

Additional studies will follow, as the researchers intend to continue their efforts “to add to the limited body of research in this area.”

 

Is a better sounding subway possible?

Photo credit: Quiet City Maps

Stephen Nessen, WNYC, writes about the Second Avenue subway in New York City and the efforts that were made to improve the sound in its stations. He introduces us to Joe Solway of the international engineering firm ARUP, which designed the new Second Avenue stations.  Solway spent 15 years working on the subway, “figuring out how to eliminate squealing wheels and loud distorted announcements.” He lists the measures taken to make the experience as good as it could be given that “[t]he new system had to work with the existing system.” Among other things, Solway said that they redesigned the way the rails are fastened to the ground, encasing them in rubber that mitigates vibration, used better booths and cables and high quality speakers, and installed sound absorbing panels on the walls and ceiling.

So, did it work? Commuter Rafael Colon thought so. “It’s very quiet, like unusually quiet, not like when you take the number 6 train,” he said.

Click below to hear Nessen’s interview of Solway:

 

Finding it hard to escape noise? This could be why:

In “A Map of Noisy America,” CityLab writes about the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics’ (BTS) new National Transportation Noise Map, which shows that “more than 97 percent of the U.S. population has the potential to be exposed to noise from aviation and Interstate highways at levels below 50 decibels or roughly comparable to the noise level of a humming refrigerator.”  The map also reveals that “[l]ess than one-tenth of a percent of the population could potentially experience noise levels of 80 decibels or more.” So that’s not bad, right? Well, yes and no.

CityLab notes that “noise doesn’t have to be particularly penetrating to be a public health menace,” adding that the World Health Organization “set a benchmark of recommended exposure to night sounds for Europeans” at 40 decibels.  Why so low?  Because studies have shown that sleep schedules are interrupted by noise over 42 decibels, “[e]xposure to road noise above 50 decibels (comparable to a quiet office) has been associated with higher risks of heart attack,” and noise has been linked to obesity and other maladies.

So check out the map and see how your community fares, but keep in mind that this map only looks at aviation and highway noise.  Next up?  The BTS states that “future versions of the National Transportation Noise Map are envisioned to include additional transportation noise sources, such as rail and maritime.”  We’ll keep you posted.

Can Subway Noise Damage Your Hearing?

Photo credit: Quiet City Maps

Sadly, the short answer is yes. And the longer answer is that some subway stations are more dangerous to your hearing than others.  Anil Lalwani, MD, an otolaryngologist at Columbia University Medical Center and NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, and his colleagues prepared a study that examined whether subway station design influenced noise levels. Dr. Lalwani and his team went to twenty stations in Manhattan and discovered “that the noisiest platforms shared one thing in common: curved tracks.”  Click the link above to view Dr. Lalwani’s video about this study, its conclusion, and to hear Dr. Lalwani’s recommendations about “what we can do to reduce the risk of long-term hearing damage from subway noise exposure.”