community reactions and criteria: wind turbine noise robert w. rand, ince rand acoustics brunswick,...

COMMUNITY REACTIONS and CRITERIA:

WIND TURBINE NOISE

Robert W. Rand, INCERand Acoustics

Brunswick, Maine

Rand Acoustics - Shelburne Falls, March 3, 2012 1


Code of Massachusetts Regulations (Title 310, Section 7.10, amended September 1, 1972)

Policy

A noise source will be considered to be violating the Department’s noise regulation (310 CMR 7.10) if the source:

1. Increases the broadband sound level by more than 10 dB(A)above ambient, or

2. Produce a “pure tone” condition – when any octave band centerfrequency sound pressure level exceeds the two adjacentcenter frequency sound pressure levels by 3 decibels or more.

These criteria are measured both at the property line and at the nearest inhabited residence. “Ambient” is defined as the background A-weighted sound level that is exceeded 90% of the time, measured during equipment operating hours. “Ambient” may also be established by other means with consent of the Department.


MassCEC Acoustic Study Methodology for Wind Turbine Projects Issued: December 9, 2011

The methodology is intended to be compatible with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection’s (MassDEP) noise regulation. However, the methodology is not intended in any way to alter, substitute, create, or enforce any policy or regulation that is in force or may be developed by MassDEP or any other regulatory agency. While this methodology is intended to assist project developers anticipate whether a project will comply with MassDEP’s noise regulation, following this methodology in itself does not constitute or guarantee compliance with MassDEP’s noise regulation. MassCEC assumes no responsibility or liability arising from or related to a project’s failure to meet MassDEP’s noise regulation.

While use of this methodology is required for MassCEC acoustic studies initiated after the issue date of this document, MassCEC recognizes that studies conducted under other methodologies may be equally valid.

ISO and EPA Case StudiesAnnoyance

Health Effects



International Standards Organization, ISO/TC 43 New York: United Nations, November 1969.

EPA Levels Document 1974. Similar method in ANSI S1.9 Part 4.Rand Acoustics - Shelburne Falls, March 3, 2012 6


Table D-7

CORRECTIONS TO BE ADDED TO THE MEASURED DAY-NIGHT SOUND LEVEL (Ldn) OF INTRUDING NOISE TO OBTAIN NORMALIZED Ldn1

Type of Correction

Description Amount of Correction

to be Added to Measured Ldn in dB

Seasonal Correction

Summer (or year-round operation) Winter only (or windows always closed)

0

-5

Correction for Outdoor Noise Level Measured in Absence of Intruding Noise

Quiet suburban or rural community (remote from large cities and from industrial activity and trucking)

+10

Normal suburban community (not located near industrial activity)

+5

Urban residential community (not immediately adjacent to heavily traveled roads and industrial areas)

0

Noisy urban residential community (near relatively busy roads or industrial areas)

-5

Very noisy urban residential community -10

Correction for Previous Exposure & Community Attitudes

No prior experience with the intruding noise +5

Community has had some previous exposure to intruding noise but little effort is being made to control the noise. This correction may also be applied in a situation where the community has not been exposed to the noise previously, but the people are aware that bona fide efforts are being made to control the noise.

0

Community has had considerable previous exposure to the intruding noise and the noise maker's relations with the community are good

-5

Community aware that operation causing noise is very necessary and it will not continue indefinitely. This correction can be applied for an operation of limited duration and under emergency circumstances.

-10

Pure Tone or Impulse

No pure tone or impulsive character Pure tone or impulsive character present

0

+5

0

+10

+5

+5

NORMALIZATION:

correctionfrom urban

residential to rural, intrusive:

20 dB

Response to noise from modern windfarms in The Netherlands, E. Pedersen,J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126(2), August 2009.



Unweighted3 dB per doubling

of distance

dBA6 dB per doubling

of distance

Health Effects (WHO 2009)Rand Acoustics - Shelburne Falls, March 3, 2012 17

"NOEL"

"LOAEL"

< 30

30 - 40

40 - 55

> 55

( PRIMARILY TRAFFIC )


Wind Shear – Stronger In New England Than On Test Stands. - Mass CEC wind noise regression method not supported.- Noise Reduction Options (NROs) don’t work.


Developers often say that the wind turbine noise will be inaudible over the wind noise.

IS “MASKING” REAL?

Not until the wind turbine noise is very quiet.

“From the experimental results it has been observed that the masking threshold occur when the wind

turbine noise level is around 10 dB lower than the ambient sound levels.” Bolin 2009.



of distance


of distance



of distance


of distance

A, C, and G-weighting filter response


"The subjective annoyance increases markedly when the noise level is increased beyond 20 dB [indoors]. Recent research has supported the assessments behind the recommended noise limits for low frequency noise, and there is no doubt that loud low frequency noise is very annoying.“ Danish Ministry, January 2012.


IN THE NEWS…

In the mid-2000s Australian Upper house MP Simon Ramsay was a vocal champion of wind energy and obtained permits for turbines on a parcel of his own land, which he has since sold. His recent activism has included campaigning against turbines for which he previously held permits. .. the MP said the wind farm would damage his amenity at his family farm ''East Mooleric'', which had been in his family for generations, including from noise and interruption of his ''iconic views'' to the Otway Ranges. He sought a string of concessions, including that the company pay him $66,000 to grow trees as a noise and visual screen, and scrap all turbines within two kilometres of his home. (1.24 miles)

http://www.theage.com.au/environment/energy-smart/mp-pressured-wind-farm-developer-20120221-1tlwc.html


WHAT CRITERIA PREVENT ADVERSE IMPACT?

- “Hold paramount the safety, health and well-being of the public.” (Ethics requirement; engineers, INCE.)

- The only reliable noise control engineering method for wind turbines is distance. (NROs fail in high wind shear.)

- Design to avoid widespread complaints. (Sound levels higher than 33 dBA are associated with widespread complaints in quiet rural areas due to noise increases.)

- Design to avoid Low Frequency sound levels above 20 dBA indoors. (Apply Danish wind turbine LF noise limit).

Thank you for listening.

Robert W. Rand, INCERand Acoustics

Brunswick, Maine


community reactions and criteria: wind turbine noise robert w. rand, ince rand acoustics brunswick,...

Documents