Noise Pollution: Health Hazards

Noise pollution is anthropogenic sound, noise generated by humans, that impairs transmission of natural sounds. Major agents of noise pollution are highways, railways, harbors, airports, urban centers and industry.  

Why is it harmful?

In the last decade, conservationists have recognized the detrimental impacts of noise pollution on terrestrial and marine animals. It masks strategic sounds for survival that effect foraging behaviors, breeding success, community structure, and predator avoidance responses.

As an example, for each decibel increase of noise, the hunting success of northern saw-whet owls decreased by 8%. Noise can cause a 40% decrease of prey capture in Brazilian free-tailed bats that use echolocation to feed. In some frog and bird species, noise pollution causes physiological stress, increasing hormones that negatively impact reproductive rates. Marine life is perhaps the most impacted by noise pollution since they are more dependent on auditory cues over visual cues for survival. 

Through acoustic monitoring, scientists have also found our noise pollution is reaching out to remote wilderness sites changing the acoustic characteristics of ecosystems well beyond city limits. This degrades the natural sonic environments required for certain species to receive acoustic signals over longer distances. Some migratory and territorial species are heavily impacted by this.

Human relationships with National parks and green spaces are affected by noise pollution as well. It is well documented that natural soundscapes have a substantial impact on recovery from stressful events. Studies show that the sounds of nature significantly reduced heart rate and blood pressure. Furthermore, noise pollution inhibits the positive side effects of natural sounds. The World Health Organization (WHO) has labeled noise as a major threat to human health. It can lead to hearing loss, stress, sleep disorders, attention decrease, and strokes. Traffic noise, in particular, increases the risk of cardiovascular diseases, especially among men.    

What can we do?

Noise abatement technologies have been in development for years. However, since there is no incentive within the United States for big industry or urban planning to implement noise control, very little progress has been made to reduce noise pollution. We need to push for legislation that provides regulations, financial incentives, and mandates the use of noise abatement technologies and strategies.

The best example has been from the communities around airports. Residents have demanded noise restrictions that have forced the aviation industry to develop sound mitigation solutions. Over the last 30 years, The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and NASA have been developing equipment and strategies to lower aviation noise and have successfully reduced aircraft noise by 20 dB. However, due to the slow introduction of these technologies to aircrafts, and the increase of passengers and cargo, the global impact of noise pollution from aircrafts is expected to remain constant. If constituents continue to push their politicians to enact more restrictive noise control, big industry will be forced to further invest in and implement noise abatement practices and technologies. 

Going forward, noise mitigation needs to be considered at the urban planning stage. Source control (eliminating sound at the source) should be highly prioritized as it is the most cost effective. Regulations should require that the available sound abatement technologies and infrastructure be use to reduce and eliminate sound from the source. As an example, the use of "quiet pavements" should be mandatory for city streets, highways, and especially roadways within national and state parks. The majority of traffic noise comes not from the car engine, but the interaction between tire and pavement. Quiet pavements have been in development and tested in Europe and can cut traffic noise by 25%.  

When source control is not sufficient, path control may be implemented. Construction of buildings need to incorporate architecture that attenuates sound by reflecting and absorbing energy. Space should be allowed for sound barriers such as planting more trees. Trees in urban areas to help break up the sound through absorption, dispersion, reflection and refraction. 

The growth of human population and urban areas demands we continue to refine and develop new sound abetment technologies in order to protect the environment. Governments and industry will not invest capitol in such development unless there is strong advocation from the people demanding regulatory changes. For more ways to get involved click HERE. 

References

Annerstedt, M., Jonsson, P., Wallergard, M. Johansson, G., Karlson, B., Grahn, P., Hansen, A. M., and Wahrborg, P. (2013). Inducing physiological stress recovery with sounds of nature in a virtual reality forest results from a pilot study. Physiology & Behavior, 118; 240-250. 

Asphalt Institute.(n.d.). Noise-reducing pavements get loud acclaim in US and Europe: understanding the issue. Retrieved April 9, 2020, from http://asphaltmagazine.com/noise-reducing-pavements-get-loud-acclaim-in-us-and-europe-understanding-the-issue/

Babisch, W., Beule, B., Schust, M, Kersten, N., and Ising, H. (2005) Traffic noise and the risk of myocardial infarction. Epidemiology, 16, 33-40.

Balmford, A. and Cowling, R.M. (2006). Fusion or failure? The future of conservation biology. Conservation Biology, 20, 692-695.

Barber, J., Fristrup, K., Brown, C.,  Hardy, A., Angeloni, L., and Crooks, K. (2010). Conserving the wildlife therein protecting park fauna from anthropogenic noise. Park Science, 26 (3).   

Bucur, V. (2006) Urban Forest Acoustics. Springer, Berlin.

Bunkley, J.P., McClure, J.W., Kleist, N., Francis, C.D., and Barber, J.R. (2015) Anthropogenic noise alters bat activity levels and echolocation calls. Global Ecology and Conservation, 3, 62-71.

Farina, A., and Stuart, H.G. (2017). Ecoacoustics: The Ecological Role of Sounds. (1st ed.). John Wiley and Sons. 

Fisher, J. (1998). What the Hills Are Alive with: In Defense of the Sounds of Nature. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 56 (2); 167-179.

Ghezeljeha, T. N., Nasari, M., Haghani, H., and Loieh, H. R. (2017). The effect of nature sounds on physiological indicators among patients in the cardiac care unit. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, 29; 147-152

Injaian, A., Poon, L., Patricelli, G. (2018) Effects of experimental anthropogenic noise on avian settlement patterns and reproductive success, Behavioral Ecology, 29, 1181–1189

Kern, J., and Redford, A. (2016). Anthropogenic noise disrupts use of vocal information about predation risk. Environmental Pollution, 218; 988-995. 

Ketten, D. R. (2004). Marine Mammal Auditory Systems: A Summary of Audiometric and Anatomical Data and Implications for Underwater Acoustic Impacts, Polarforschung, Bremerhaven, Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research & German Society of Polar Research, 72 (2/3), pp. 79-92 .

Kleist, N. J.,  Guralnick, R. P., Cruz, A. and  Francis, C. D..  2016.  Anthropogenic noise weakens territorial response to intruder's songs. Ecosphere  7( 3):e01259. 

Krause, B. (2016). Wild Soundscapes: discovering the voice of the natural world. (2nd ed.). Yale University Press. 

Ladle, R., Correia, R., Do, Y., Jae Joo, G., Malhado, A., Proulx, R., and Roberge, J. (2016). Conservation Culturomics. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14 (5); 269-275.

Mason, J., McClure, C., Barber, J. (2016). Anthropogenic noise impairs owl hunting behavior.

Biological Conservation, 199; 29-32.

Medvedev, O., Shepherd, D., and Hautus, M. (2015). The restorative potential of soundscapes: A physiological investigation. Applied Acoustics, 96; 20-26. 

National Academy of Engineering. 2010. Technology for a Quieter America. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 

Slabbekoorn, H. (2017). Anthropogenic Noise: Impacts on Animals. Encyclopedia of Animal Behavior, 82-88.

Spigaa, L., Aldreda, N., and Caldwella, G. (2017). Anthropogenic noise compromises the anti-predator behaviour of the European seabass, Dicentrarchus labrax. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 122 (1-2); 297-305

Tennessen, J. B., Parks, S. E., and Langkilde, T. (2014) Traffic noise causes physiological stress and impairs breeding migration behaviors in frogs. Conservation Physiology, 2, 1-8.

Tyack, P. (2009). Acoustic playback experiments to study behavioral responses of free-ranging marine animals to anthropogenic sound. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 395, 187-200. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/24874250

Watts, G. R., and Pheasant, R. J. (2015). Tranquillity in the Scottish Highlands and Dartmoor National Park – The importance of soundscapes and emotional factors. Applied Acoustics, 89; 297-305.

World Health Organization (2016) Global Report On Urban Health: Equitable, Healthier Cities for Sustainable Development, World Health Organization, Geneva.