MENU
  • Scitation Home
SUBMIT YOUR ARTICLE

Thank you

For your interest in the The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

Check for updates on crossmark
Prev Next
No Access Submitted: 03 December 2008 Accepted: 08 June 2009 Published Online: 28 July 2009

Response to noise from modern wind farms in The Netherlands

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 126, 634 (2009); https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3160293
Eja Pedersena)
  • Halmstad University and University of Gothenburg, Halmstad University, P.O. Box 823, SE-301 18 Halmstad, Sweden
    • Frits van den Berg
  • University of Groningen and GGD Amsterdam, GGD Amsterdam, P.O. Box 2200, 1000 CE Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    • Roel Bakker
  • University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, A. Deusinglaan 1, 7913 AV Groningen, The Netherlands
    • Jelte Bouma
  • University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, A. Deusinglaan 1, 7913 AV Groningen, The Netherlands
    • more...View Affiliations
    ABSTRACT
    The increasing number and size of wind farms call for more data on human response to wind turbine noise, so that a generalized dose-response relationship can be modeled and possible adverse health effects avoided. This paper reports the results of a 2007 field study in The Netherlands with 725 respondents. A dose-response relationship between calculated A-weighted sound pressure levels and reported perception and annoyance was found. Wind turbine noise was more annoying than transportation noise or industrial noise at comparable levels, possibly due to specific sound properties such as a “swishing” quality, temporal variability, and lack of nighttime abatement. High turbine visibility enhances negative response, and having wind turbines visible from the dwelling significantly increased the risk of annoyance. Annoyance was strongly correlated with a negative attitude toward the visual impact of wind turbines on the landscape. The study further demonstrates that people who benefit economically from wind turbines have a significantly decreased risk of annoyance, despite exposure to similar sound levels. Response to wind turbine noise was similar to that found in Sweden so the dose-response relationship should be generalizable.

    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

    The study was financed by the European Union as a Specific Support Action, Contract No. 044628. The authors also thank former students Jan Oudelaar, Eildert Slim, and Rowan Rossing for their help, and Wind Service Holland for providing the wind turbine location data.

    REFERENCES
    Section:
    Previous sectionNext section

    1. 1. Altman, D. G., Machin, D., Bryant, T. N., and Gardner, M. J. (2000). Statistics With Confidence, 2nd ed. (BMJ Books, London). Google Scholar
    2. 2. Bengtsson, J., Persson Waye, K., and Kjellberg, A. (2004). “Sound characteristics in low frequency noise and their relevance for the perception of pleasantness,” Acta. Acust. Acust. 90, 171–180. Google Scholar
    3. 3. Bradley, J. S. (1994). “Annoyance caused by constant-amplitude and amplitude-modulated sound containing rumble,” Noise Control Eng. J. 42, 203–208. https://doi.org/10.3397/1.2828357, Google ScholarCrossref
    4. 4. Brown, B. B. (1987). “Territoriality,” in Handbook of Environmental Psychology, edited by D. Stokols and I. Altman (Wiley, New York). Google Scholar
    5. 5. Calvert, G. A. (2001). “Crossmodal processing in the human brain: Insights from functional neuroimaging studies,” Cereb. Cortex 11, 1110–1123. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/11.12.1110, Google ScholarCrossref
    6. 6. END (2002). “European Noise Directive 2002/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 25 June 2002, relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise,” European Parliament and Council. Google Scholar
    7. 7. Geen, R. G., and McCown, E. J. (1984). “Effects of noise and attack on aggression and physiological arousal,” Motiv. Emot. 8, 231–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00991891, Google ScholarCrossref
    8. 8. Giuliani, M. V., and Feldman, R. (1993). “Place attachment in a developmental and cultural context,” J. Environ. Psychol. 13, 267–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80179-3, Google ScholarCrossref
    9. 9. Hatfield, J., Job, R. F., Hede, A. J., Carter, N. L., Peploe, P., Taylor, R., and Morrell, S. (2002). “Human response to environmental noise: The role of perceived control,” J. Behav. Med. 9, 341–359. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327558IJBM0904_04, Google ScholarCrossref
    10. 10. ISO (1996).“Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors. Part 2: General method of calculation,” ISO 9613-2, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva. Google Scholar
    11. 11. Jakobsen, J. (2005). “Infrasound emission from wind turbines,” Low Freq. Noise, Vib., Act. Control 24, 145–155. https://doi.org/10.1260/026309205775374451, Google ScholarCrossref
    12. 12. Lazarus, R. S., and Cohen, J. B. (1977). “Environmental stress,” in Human Behavior and Environment: Advances in Theory and Research, edited by I. Altman and J. F. Wohlwill (Plenum, New York), Vol. 2. Google ScholarCrossref
    13. 13. Miedema, H. M. E., and Oudshoorn, C. G. M. (2001). “Annoyance from transportation noise; relationships with exposure metrics DNL and DENL and their confidence intervals,” Environ. Health Perspect. 109, 409–416. https://doi.org/10.2307/3454901, Google ScholarCrossref
    14. 14. Miedema, H. M. E., and Vos, H. (1998). “Exposure-response relationships for transportation noise,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104, 3432–3445. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.423927, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
    15. 15. Miedema, H. M. E., and Vos, H. (2004). “Noise annoyance from stationary sources: Relationships with exposure metric day-evening-night level (DENL) and their confidence intervals,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116, 334–343. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1755241, Google ScholarScitation
    16. 16. Miedema, H. M. E., Vos, H., and de Jong, R. G. (2000). “Community reaction to aircraft noise; time-of-day penalty and tradeoff between levels of overflights,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107, 3245–3253. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.429396, Google ScholarScitation
    17. 17. NZS (1998). “The assessment and measurement of sound from wind generators,” New Zealand Standard 6808:1998, Standards Council of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand. Google Scholar
    18. 18. Pedersen, E., Hallberg, L. R.-M., and Persson Waye, K. (2007). “Living in the vicinity of wind turbines—A grounded theory study,” Qual. Res. Psychol. 4, 49–63. Google ScholarCrossref
    19. 19. Pedersen, E., and Persson Waye, K. (2004). “Perception and annoyance due to wind turbine noise: A dose–response relationship,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116, 3460–3470. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1815091, Google ScholarScitation
    20. 20. Pedersen, E., and Persson Waye, K. (2007). “Wind turbine noise, annoyance and self-reported health and wellbeing in different living environments,” Occup. Environ. Med. 64, 480–486. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.2006.031039, Google ScholarCrossref
    21. 21. Pedersen, T. H., and Nielsen, K. S. (1994). “Genvirkning af støj fra vindmøller (Annoyance by noise from wind turbines),” Report No. 150, DELTA Acoustic and Vibration, Lydtekniske Institut, Copenhagen. Google Scholar
    22. 22. Persson Waye, K., and Öhrström, E. (2002). “Psycho-acoustic characters of relevance for annoyance of wind turbine noise,” J. Sound Vib. 250, 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1006/jsvi.2001.3905, Google ScholarCrossref
    23. 23. Stansfeld, S. A., and Matheson, M. P. (2003). “Noise pollution: Non-auditory effects on health,” Br. Med. Bull. 68, 243–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldg033, Google ScholarCrossref
    24. 24. Van den Berg, F. (2005). “The beat is getting stronger: The effect of atmospheric stability on low frequency modulated sound of wind turbines,” Low Freq. Noise, Vib., Act. Control 24, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1260/0263092054037702, Google ScholarCrossref
    25. 25. Van den Berg, F. (2007). “The sound of high winds: The effect of atmospheric stability on wind turbine sound and microphone noise,” Doctoral thesis, Rijksuniversiteit, Groningen, The Netherlands. Google Scholar
    26. 26. Van den Berg, F. (2008). “Criteria for wind farm noise: Lmax and Lden,” Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Noise control, EURONOISE, Acoustics ”08, Paris, France. Google Scholar
    27. 27. VROM (1999). Halndleiding Meten en Rekenen Insturielawaii (Manual for Measuring and Calculating Industrial Noise) (Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer, den Haag, The Netherlands). Google Scholar
    28. 28. WHO (2000). Guidelines for Community Noise, edited by B. Berglund, T. Lindvall, D. H. Schwela, and K. -T. Goh (World Health Organization, Geneva). Google Scholar
    29. 29. Wolsink, M., and Sprengers, M. (1993). “Wind turbine noise: A new environmental threat?,” Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress on the Biological Effects of Noise, ICBEN, Nice, France, Vol. 2, pp. 235–238. Google Scholar
    30. 30. Wolsink, M., Sprengers, M., Keuper, A., Pedersen, T. H., and Westra, C. A. (1993). “Annoyance from wind turbine noise on sixteen sites in three countries,” Proceedings of the European Community Wind Energy Conference, Lübeck, Travemünde, pp. 273–276. Google Scholar
    1. © 2009 Acoustical Society of America.

    Article Metrics

    Views
    619
    Citations
    Crossref 168
    Web of Science
    ISI 188

    Altmetric

    Please Note: The number of views represents the full text views from December 2016 to date. Article views prior to December 2016 are not included.