Noise Pollution Thermal and Acoustic

Noise Pollution Thermal and Acoustic Risks of New Airport Expansion The Airport Services Limited Company has retained Bradford Environmental Consultants to conduct studies on the impact of thermal and acoustic risks associated with an expansion project at the Yakutsk International Airport. Airport Services Limited is one of the UK's premier freight forwarding and travel management companies (Airport Services Limited, 2007). It has decided to expand its commercial offerings to the Yakutsk International Airport.

The Yakutsk International Airport is located in a major oil field and in an area that is rich with many natural resources. This airport was of very little commercial interest in the past due to the harsh environment surrounding it. It is the only airport located in the permafrost zone (Yakutsk International Airport, 2007). Recent interest in the abundant natural resources in the areas has caused the population in the area to increase significantly. Currently, the airport is shared by both military and civilian aircraft.

Military aircraft take precedence, causing restricted civilian aircraft movements. Topographical and geological circumstances make it unfeasible to build an entirely new civilian airport. It has been agreed that a second runway and a new terminal building will be constructed adjacent to the existing runway. In the future, a third runway may be built if the need arises due to increased traffic. The existing runway will continue to be used by the military.

Some civilian flights will be able to use it in case of overflow, but only if the military does not have an urgency. The new runway will be dedicated to civilian aircraft. It is expected that it will take approximately 18 months to complete. This is an extremely high risk project from a health and safety standpoint. During construction of the new runway, the existing runway will continue to be used by both military and civilian aircraft. Approximately 60-70 combined aircraft movements are expected each day.

This is expected to double when the new runway is completed. Aside from the financial and operational risks associated with this project, there are many thermal and acoustic risks that will be associated with the project. Airport Services Limited has asked Bradford Environmental Consultants to conduct a study of the potential thermal and acoustic risks both during construction and after the new runway is operational.

The following will assess these risks and make recommendations as to how to mitigate these risks so that they do not pose a threat to humans at any time during the construction phase, or in the long-term future. Section 1.0: Legal Aspects of the Project This project will intermarry three companies from different countries around the globe. Airport Services Limited is a company based in the UK. Our company, Bradford Environmental Services is a U.S. based company. The final location of the airport will be based in Yakutsk, Russia.

Therefore, there are concerns regarding the ability to address all of the legal aspects of this international project. The following will examine the legal perspectives of the project and the pertinent legislation regarding thermal and acoustic hazards. Russian Environmental Law Environmental law in the former Soviet Union was non-existent. This regime simply ignored environmental devastation and the potential health effects on its population. However, in the 1990s, they began to pay closer attention to the link between declining health in the general population and pollution (Country-Studies, 2007).

The prevailing philosophy of the government before this time was Russia had enough natural resources to waste (Country-Studies, 2007). In the 1990s it was discovered that 40% of Russia was under some form of ecological stress, no considering those areas with radiation contamination (Country-Studies, 2007). Russia has a long history of ecological disasters with little concern over them. The environment has been of little concern to the Russian public.

In a 1989 poll, citizens expressed concerns over local environmental issues that had an immediate impact on their lives, but they were unconcerned about global or national environmental issues. The survey revealed that they were unwilling to make economic sacrifices to help improve the state of the environment (Country-Studies, 2007). The political landscape in Russia concerning environmental issues is that economic concerns far outweigh any impact that they would have on the environment. In 1991, Yeltsin signed Russia's first environmental law.

The law was written in such as fashion that it gave the citizens general environmental right, without setting specific goals (Country-Studies, 2007). The law was worded in such as fashion as to make it difficult to enforce. In 1995, a law was passed that required an environmental impact assessment for new construction and development structures (Country-Studies, 2007). This report is being conducted in fulfillment of this requirement. Many of the environmental laws that do exist in Russia are concerned with water, soil, and air pollution.

There is little concern with thermal and acoustic pollution that are a part of this study. Russia has signed several international treaties such as the Tropical Timber Agreement (1983), Convention on International trade in Endangered Species (CITES, 19730. And the Montreal Protocol controlling substances harmful to the ozone layer (Country-Studies, 2007). However, none of these are of concern to this project. The environmental laws that do exist in Russia are lax and often violations are overlooked (Innset, 2007).

As far as this project is concerned, Russian environmental laws will have little impact on the outcome of the project. Therefore, in keeping with the good faith of the citizen, Bradford will rely on the laws that apply to their general contractor. The company will look to UK and U.S. laws to determine the safest methods for conducting this project. UK Law Noise pollution is a growing issue in both Common and Statutory law in the UK. (Sneider and Phil, 2005).

Noise pollution can be a problematic health issue in the workplace and at home. However, UK law only examines issues related to noise pollution in the workplace (Sneider and Phil, 2005). UK law, as applied to the scope of this project would not answer issues dealing with the problem of noise as it affects housing in the surrounding community. It would cover issues dealing with the workers themselves and the exposure of terminal staff. However, UK law would only be limited to dealing with those issues (Sneider and Phil, 2005).

In the UK, noise is regulated under several different agencies. It is regulated under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA). In England and Wales, the authority of the local power stems from Section 80 of the EPA. In Scotland, the Control of Pollution Act 1974, section 58 governs noise ordinances. In Northern Ireland, the Pollution Control and Local Government Act sets forth certain steps that local authorities will take when they become aware that a noise nuisance exists (Sneider and Phil, 2005).

As one can see, in the UK noise reduction and nuisance comes under the control of local authorities. This contrasts with the situation in Russia where control is on a National level. In Russia, there is no mention of noise in laws concerning the environment. Under UK law, no particular authority would have the jurisdiction necessary to intervene in a project that takes place in another country.

Furthermore, UK law only requires that when a nuisance noise is found, the person or entity must only prove that they are taking reasonable steps to reduce the noise nuisance. This legislation, like that in Russia leaves much up to the interpretation of local authorities. It would be difficult to write such legislation in such a manner that it would cover each and every circumstance that would arise. Therefore, laws can only make suggestions as to what an amicable resolution would look like.

There are likely to be circumstances where the people do not feel that enough has been done and where authorities insist that they are doing the best that they can. This is the situation that has potential to arise in the course of this project. However, it is felt that this situation can be avoided if due consideration is given to the distance and building design in the new terminal.

The design specifics will have to be addressed in conjunction with others on the planning team, but it is important to stress that noise issues could be a potential source of controversy among the citizens and Russian authorities.UK law gives us few helpful suggestions when considering the potential noise issues in the construction and occupation of the new terminal and runway. US Law The United States has some of the most specific and stringent laws in the world regarding noise control. Title 42, Chapter 65 of the U.S.

Code specifically addresses noise control, legal remedies for violations, and definitions to help determine safe public noise levels. Unlike UK laws that deal primarily with residential noise, the U.S. Code specifically addresses industrial noise. Several sections of Title 42 address noise from aircraft and other moving sources. The standards set specific levels and minimal protection for passengers and workers (U.S. Code, Title 42, Chapter 65). The negative health risks to humans associated with long-term noise exposure are well documented in the U.S.

However, Russia continues to treat noise exposure as a minor problem. American physicians have associated some seemingly unrelated conditions to sound exposure. Long-term exposure to transportation noise has been associated with increased cardiovascular risk (Babisch, 2006). Hearing loss can occur at even low levels of sound that occur for an extended time (Sisto et al., 2007; Reuter et al., 2007; Dobie, 2007). Noise related hearing loss can occur in a variety of work settings (Mrena et al., 2007; Trost and Shaw, 2007; Moon 2007). ).

Therefore, every work situation needs to be evaluated for the potential to cause hearing loss. Many of the ill effects of noise may be linked to loss of sleep (Rios and daSilva, 2005; Robertson et al., 2007; Lu et al., 2005). Although the limits set by Title 42 are not requirements by Russia or the UK, they will be used as guidelines in the design of the structure. In the U.S. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) sets guidelines for workers during an 8-hour workday (OSHA, 2007).

This facility will not be subject to inspection by OSHA, but its regulations set an excellent standard for worker safety. Therefore, it is in the best interest of the workers to use OSHA guidelines as the guiding principles for this project. Using U.S. standards will assure that the passengers and workers are afforded the highest level of protection possible. Even though this is not a requirement, the project will adhere to the most stringent set of rules in reference to sound protection issues.

Thermal Pollution Thermal pollution typically refers to an effluent that is released into a stream or other body of water. The effluent causes a rise in the temperature of the water, places wildlife at risk. There are no streams or waterways surrounding the airport that would be affected by thermal pollution from aircraft. As always, one has to be careful with fuels, petroleum products and other materials to assure that they are handled and disposed of in a safe fashion.

However, in this project there is little risk of a thermal pollution problem. Although there is little risk of thermal pollution via the typical routes, there is some risk that aircraft activity may place the permafrost at risk. This problem was first addressed by Dingman, Weeks, and Yin-Chao (1967). However, there has been little research conducted in this area since that time. There are few inhabitants or human concerns in the permafrost region. This airport is an exception to the rule.

The key problem that is of concern to this project is that thermal pollution does not melt the permafrost causing instability in the substrate. It is not expected that this will be a significant problem, but a monitoring program will be instituted as a part of this project in order to make certain that thermal pollution does not become a problem in the future.

Conclusion Russian and UK laws give us few clues that will help to resolve the potential noise problem that may arise during the construction and occupation of the new terminal and runway. The legislative role on the issue of noise pollution is one of guidance, rather than strict regulation. Laws in all three countries that will be involved realize that there is no way to predict every circumstance that could arise from the issue.

Therefore, common sense and concern for the occupants, neighbors and other stakeholders must be the guiding principle that governs the control of thermal and noise issues throughout the project. The ultimate goal of this firm is to consider all of the perspectives of the may stakeholders that will be affected by the project. It will attempt to ascertain the optimal building materials to be used and will suggest locations for structures based on maximizing the distance between the sound source and the listener.

It will have to consider many perspectives from a daily exposure standpoint. For instance, it will have to consider the exposure of a passenger that is only exposed to a noise for a short time and that of a worker that will be exposed to a sound to 8 hours, 5 days a week or more. The analysis will consider these factors for all of the groups involved in the project. Noise abatement is a concern throughout the project.

However, noise abatement will have to be considered along with all of the other design issues that arise. One of the most difficult tasks in this project will be to convince Russian authorities of the potential dangers and attention that needs to be payed to the noise issue. They have taken a rather non-chalant attitude towards worker exposure to noise in the past. However, as a U.S. firm, noise is a serious consideration in any project.

This may represent a potential clash during the project that will have to be handled when the time comes. However, going armed with the latest statistics on the harmful effects of noise and the costs associated with it should help to make the Russians more aware of the problem and its importance. The consulting firm will have to be proactive in its approach to the importance of the noise issue. It can anticipate that it will have to overcome a lack of concern on the part of the Russian authorities.

Section 2.0: Why Noise is a Concern on This Project One of the key problems in dealing with noise from a legal perspective is that what constitutes "noise" is difficult to define. The definition of noise is subjective and will differ depending on whom one asks. Noise, by the strictest definition means sound that passes from one space to another (Sneider and Phil, 2005). However, not every sound that passes from one space to another is considered to be noise. Some sounds are considered pleasurable and not bothersome at all.

In order to be considered "noise" the sound has to be considered bothersome in some manner to someone. However, when a noise becomes bothersome is also highly subjective. One person may consider a sound to be noise, while it barely bothers another. This question of what constitutes "noise," as opposed to simply "sound" has confounded the UK legal profession for decades. Legal professionals in the United States are confronted with a similar dilemma. The most commonly accepted definition of "noise" means a sound that poses a potential health risk.

A sound that can damage hearing would definitely be considered to be "noise" by most definitions. However, it may be noted that individuals differ in their sensitivity to pressures in the ear caused by sound (Sneider and Phil, 2005). However, there are known averages under which damage typically occurs to hearing. These averages are used to determine minimum and maximum allowable sound levels to ensure health and safety. Research has found that the environment has a considerable amount to do with how sound effects one's susceptibility to hear.

The type of building materials and their acoustic properties, dampness, condensation, thermal insulation and heating all contribute to how sound effects individuals in the space (Sneider and Phil, 2005). Therefore, when we begin to discuss the new terminal, these factors will have to be considered from a design perspective. The choice of building materials will have to take into account the acoustic properties of the material. Several attributes of human hearing will have to be taken into account in the design of the buildings.

One is that the human ear notices high frequencies more easily than low frequencies. The second is that two sounds being heard simultaneously have an additive effect as far as loudness is concerned (Sneider and Phil, 2005). Airport noise is treated differently from standard noise, such as construction noise. Loudness, in terms of decibels is only one aspect of the potential for noise to cause damage. Low, middle, and high frequency noises are treated differently by sound engineers (FICAN, 2007).

The reason for this is that the human ear is better suited to hearing mid to high frequencies. Sounds in this range are more annoying than those that lie outside the human range of hearing. Therefore, special consideration will have to be given to sounds in this range. The a-weighted sound level (dBA) is used to measure the pressure caused by sounds within the average human hearing range (FICAN, 2007). This classification helps to distinguish between damaging sound and that which is outside of the human hearing range.

This distinction helps engineers design sound reduction systems that are the most effective in dampening the types of sound that will be the most bothersome. a-weighted sound levels will be used to help target the design of the sound insulation so that it will be the most effective. When measuring sound, the most common measurement takes into account the cumulative noise exposure from a single sound event. For instance, an aircraft flyover produces many different sounds at several different frequencies.

The total accumulative effect of these sounds is referred to as the Sound Exposure Level (SEL). This measurement is the sum of the sound energy over the duration of the event (FICAN, 2007). The SEL is normalized to one second, but for most sound events the duration will be longer. Lmax is the top allowable SEL for a single noise event to ensure that it does not cause damage. Sounds that exceed the Lmax could cause potential hearing damage.

Most aircraft related events exceed the Lmax, both in loudness and in duration (FICAN, 2007). It is difficult to alter the length of an aircraft related sound event. Therefore, the SEL must be reduced by taking measures to reduce the loudness of the event. In order to do this, engineers must concentrate on the reduction of a-weighted sound. A sound meter is the most common way to measure sound in a way that can be quantitatively compared.

A sound is perceived as loud it the level changes, relative to the previous level. The following table illustrates how the human ear perceives changes in the loudness of sound. Table 1.0 Human Perception in Changes in Sound Level Changes in sound level Change in loudness 1 dB Barely Perceivable 3 dB Requires close attention to notice 5 dB Quite noticeable 10 dB Dramatic: nearly twice as loud 20 dB Striking: fourfold change Source: (Sneider and Phil, 2005, p. 20). The loudness (measured in decibels, dBA) decreases as the source of the sound gets farther away.

This is an important concept the evaluation of noise caused by both the construction phase of the new expansion and the increased air traffic once it is completed. Situating the sound source as far from others who might be harmed is advisable. However, it is recognized that in some circumstances, this might not be possible due to topographic and geologic constraints on the site. For this reason, other measures will have to be considered in addition to distance from the source in the design of the project.

The following table demonstrates the affect of distance on the decibels heard by a listener. Table 20 the Affect of Distance on Sound Distance between talker and listener Noise level dBA Normal voice Raised voice Source: (Sneider and Phil, 2005, p. 21). As one can see from the chart a distance of 8 meters reduces the sound level of the listener by 68%. The distance of an airplane taking off does not have to be great in order to result in a significant reduction in sound to the listener.

When one is talking in terms of thousands of meters, as is the case with this project, the noise reduction factor is increased at an even greater rate. When combined with other noise reduction measures such as sound barrier walls and utilizing the best possible acoustic material for the terminal, noise levels for passenger, workers, and the surrounding neighborhood will be significantly reduced. One has to be worried about the harmful effects of sound from two different scenarios.

Sound can harm if it is only for a short time, but is of high decibel levels. It can also harm if it is experienced for a prolonged period of time, but at lower decibel levels. In the UK, the Health and Safety at Work Act requires that noise levels in the work place be limited to less than 90 dB during a typical 8-hour work day. The following table gives a comparison between various sounds and the decibel level that would be perceived by a listener.

Table 3: Comparative Sound Levels noise levels and the way individuals perceive them. Changes in sound level 140 Threshold of pain 120 Aircraft taking off (at 25 m) 110 Pneumatic drill 100 Noisy factory 90 Inside underground 80 Inside bus 70 Average traffic on main road (at kerb) 60 Normal conversation (at 1 m) 50 Typical office 40 Living room in suburban area 30 Library 20 Bedroom at night 10 Insulated broadcasting studio Threshold of hearing Source: (Sneider and Phil, 2005, p. 22).

One of the most important facts to consider in building design where people will be working for an 8-hour day, is that as the dBA level increases, the exposure time to damage decreases. For instance, a person may be safely exposed to a dBA level of 80 for an 8-hour day. However, if the dBA level is raised to 105, the amount of time that a person is allowed to be exposed according to UK law is 15 minutes.

This is perhaps one of the most important concepts that must be considered in the design of the new terminal. The farther the terminal is located from the runway, the lower the exposure risk to employees and passenger. However, this must be taken in consideration of the constraints of the aircraft. These issues will have to be discussed with other elements of the design team so that they will be at least considered in the final building design.

The Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) is another term used to describe aircraft related sound. The DNL is the average sound as it occurs over a 24-hour period. Typically noise events occurring at night are perceived to be 10 dB louder than they actually are when measured by a sound device (FICAN, 2007). This is because the human ear compares the sound to ambient noise. The DNL helps to determine the health impact of sound on the life around the airport.

If the noise level is constant, it will have different health effects than sound that occurs only one or two times per day. This project will take into consider the DNL before the construction phase and after the new terminal is completed. The goal will be to introduce measures that reduce the DNL, especially where the surrounding apartments are concerned. Section 3.0: Conclusions and Recommendations Understanding Sound Reduction Strategies In order to reduce sound to the maximum extent possible, sound insulation will play a primary role.

The design team is limited as to the distance that they can place the runway from terminal, construction team from the terminal, etc. Therefore, they will have to employ some other sound reducing technique other than distance alone. Sound insulation comes in three different forms. The source of the sound is the determining factor as to which type of sound insulation is most appropriate. The first type of insulation is room-to-room sound insulation (Sneider and Phil, 2005).

This type of insulation is used when the source of the noise is from within the building. This will be the case with conversation, vehicles, and other sources of sound from within the building. The second type of insulation is impact sound insulation, which is used when the source of the sound is from footsteps or other impacts on the building structure. The terminal will be subject to several of these types of sound as the passageways are connected and disconnected from the planes.

There will be many people walking in the terminal as well as vehicles such as golf carts, forklifts, and other heavy equipment. The third type of insulation is outside-to-inside sound insulation which is used when the source of the sound is the open air. This will be the most important form of insulation for this project. It is expected that the aircraft themselves will be a major source of sound pollution. This is the key concern for all of the stakeholders, both inside and outside of the facility.

Two distinct elements are needed to control sound. One first needs to insulate against the sound and then one needs to find a way to absorb the sound. Both of these elements must be present in order to achieve the maximum sound reduction. Sound insulation will be the primary methods used to control the movement of sound within the buildings. There are several important qualities of sound insulation in buildings. The first is that of mass.

The general rule is that single-leaf insulation of any type will increase about 5 dB if the mass per unit area is doubled (Sneider and Phil, 2005). Doubling the terminal walls will help to reduce sound from the aircraft outside. One of the key problems is that little can be done as far a surrounding residential structures are concerned. If they were not built to reduce sound, then there is little that can be done now.

Perhaps the airport can advise future builders of the benefits of creating extra thick walls for their structures. Isolation is another important factor in the ability to reduce sound transmission in a building. A double-leaf wall provides better sound insulation than a single-leaf wall. This is largely due to mass, but also due to the way in which sound waves interact with the two separate masses (Sneider and Phil, 2005). When the two masses are completely isolated from one another, the sound insulation factor can be added together (Sneider and Phil, 2005).

Isolation is the primary factor responsible for sound insulation in residential structures. Humans typically do not perceive a change that is 3 dB of less as a change in noise level. However, they will perceive any change from 6-10 dB as a doubling of the noise level (FICAN, 2007). Therefore, we need to strive for a reduction in decibels above 3 dB in order of the noise abatement measures to be perceived as effective to the local community.

Another consideration in this project is that these levels were derived to reflect sound from a single source. However, airport noise differs from that used to establish safe levels as if often arise from several different sources simultaneously. During the construction phase of the project, the local community, passengers, and workers will have to contend with both the construction noise and the noise generated from incoming and departing aircraft.

The combined effects of these multiple sources of sound will make perceived noise level seem much louder than if the noise were from a single source. There are several different philosophies as to how to dampen sound that originates from several sources, as it will during this project. The first potential solution is to attempt to dampen the sound from a wholistic perspective. In other words, one could view the sound as a single entity and the terminal as a single entity.

This type of philosophy would result in a sound dampening wall, perhaps combined with acoustical building materials in order to reduce any sound, from any source that attempts to breech the building from the outside. Indoor sound would be dealt with in a similar manner to the existing building, which means the installation of acoustical indoor finishing materials. The second approach to the multiple source sound issue in this project is to eliminate each individual source of sound.

For instance, one might deal with a particular construction activity by erecting a sound-dampening barrier on the side that faces the terminal. Sound barriers could be erected between the airstrips and the terminal. One of the advantages of this approach is the flexibility that it would allow during the construction phase of the project. One could move the sound barriers to suit the changing work locations and phases. There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these approaches to the project.

If one takes the wholistic approach they would be certain to eliminate any sound source that could arise. However, this option does not allow for flexibility, as the location and angle of construction changes in relation to the terminal building. Another consideration in this option is that a permanent structure is more expensive than a temporary structure in many cases. However, it could be built in such as way as to maximize its effectiveness.

It could also remain in place after the construction phase was complete as a permanent sound reduction barrier. Considering the advantages and disadvantages of these options, it becomes apparent that there are several needs that must be met. The first is a need to produce an overall sound reduction in the old and new terminals. Although adding a sound barrier around a majority of the building adds an extra cost, it will be the most cost effective solution for the long-term.

Claims from workers that lost their hearing on the job can be much more costly than the initial cost of the sound reducing wall. However, this approach is not likely to be able to reduce all of the sound necessary during the construction phase of the project. Therefore, it is recommended that temporary sound barriers be included in the planning of each construction phase.

They will be constructed in such as manner as to make them easily movable and reconstructed in a different location, while at the same time, providing the maximum sound reduction possible. Recommendations There are many considerations in relation to sound reduction and thermal heat reduction in this project. Thermal heat poses little potential harm to the environment. The airport is located on a permafrost tundra where there is little chance of damage to nearby waterways or stream wildlife.

There may be some limited local damage to plants around the runways, but these risks are expected to be minimal. In the areas that will be affected by the thermal pollution emitted by the aircraft, the plant life will be removed and replaced with gravel. This airport is located in a harsh.