Noise Exposure in EU cities:
a challenging comparison
G. Licitra and E. Ascari
AIA-DAGA 2013
Conference on Acoustics
EAA E...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Introdution
 First round of END implementation has been completed,
first action pla...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Hot spots identification
 Actions has to be identified for hot spots and critical a...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Group indicator: areal solutions
 The need of an indicator of global noise quality
...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Gden for European cities comparison
 Gden could be used also at European level to c...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Gden adaptation to European data [1]
 Gden should be scaled on total population N.
...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Gden adaptation to European data [2]
 To apply Gden calculation to EIONET database ...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Gden use and relation with annoyance
 As already shown in cited study Gden is well ...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Groups within European dataset
 There are large difference reported in shapes of
ex...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 >75
Lden [dBA]
%of...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 >75
Lden [dBA]
%ofpopulation
...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
50,0 55,0 60,0 65,0 70,0 75,0
Gden [dbA]
%HA
decreasing >50%
d...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Relation with annoyance for countries
 England and Germany are highlighted
This is ...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Results & further analysis
 Data shows that an exponential law relates Gden and
%HA...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Gden values for European cities
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Countries average values
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
National hot spots
 Since national mapping methods influences Gden results, Gden
co...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Mapping time evolution
 Gden has been used also to evaluate improvements and
mitiga...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Local hot spots identification techniques
 As already said, it is a long detailed a...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Comparison with Qcity method in Pisa
 Probst proposed a method considering weighted...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Hot spots according Qcity method
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
 Gden levels haven’t been weighted in this study because we used
directly total lev...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Hot spots according Gden method
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Comparison
G.Licitra, P.Gallo, E.Rossi, G.Brambilla
A novel method to determine mult...
AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics
Conclusions
 Gden method is very simple to be implemented and also
to be reported a...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Noise exposure in EU cities

296 views
269 views

Published on

Published in: Business, Design
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
296
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Noise exposure in EU cities

  1. 1. Noise Exposure in EU cities: a challenging comparison G. Licitra and E. Ascari AIA-DAGA 2013 Conference on Acoustics EAA Euroregio - 18-21 March 2013
  2. 2. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Introdution  First round of END implementation has been completed, first action plans has been drawn up;  Despite an homogeneous reporting system, it’s still difficult to compare and analyse results;  In particular, difficulties in comparing maps results and exposition reflect into different possible actions;  Indicators and techniques to identify critical and quiet areas have been attempted but national laws and requirements are various.
  3. 3. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Hot spots identification  Actions has to be identified for hot spots and critical areas.  Different scores are defined according local laws and guidelines; a review of different methods has been proposed by Probst.  e.g. Qcity project has proposed a methodology different from the general linear scoring.  Hot spot identification is now provided by many softwares, as it is a relevant issue. By the way hot spots identification is still a long post-process detailed activity that often leads to loose contact with concrete actions. Noise Mapping in the EU: Models and Procedures, CRC Press, 2012 edited by G.LICITRA From noise maps to critical hot spots: Priorities in action Plans; W. Probst
  4. 4. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Group indicator: areal solutions  The need of an indicator of global noise quality improvement has been highlighted.  Lot of studies are now trying to analyse perspectives and to evaluate effects of mitigation actions along time as an average over a defined population.  A group noise indicator called Gden has been proposed in a lots of previous article to analyse environmental noise decrement along time and to compare different locations of a city. M. Weber; J. Jabben, An indicator for area specific noise impact: Gden Internoise 2010, Lisbon
  5. 5. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Gden for European cities comparison  Gden could be used also at European level to compare pollution of different cities because it is simply based upon population and Lden values, which are available for all mapped cities.  Gden values rise with population ni:  Using it as it is commonly defined would lead to identify larger cities but not to understand worst polluted cities.
  6. 6. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Gden adaptation to European data [1]  Gden should be scaled on total population N. where i indicates exposure classes and ni is population in that class.  With this renormalization Gden would be equivalent to average noise exposure of city population.
  7. 7. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Gden adaptation to European data [2]  To apply Gden calculation to EIONET database of European exposure, average values of Lden should be assigned also to external classes of exposure;  This approximation obviously introduces errors which would be larger for those cities that has an huge number of people in extreme classes. Class i Not reported (<55 dBA) 55-60 dBA 60-65 dBA 65-70 dBA 70-75 dBA >75 dBA Ldeni [dBA] 50 57.5 62.5 67.5 72.5 80
  8. 8. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Gden use and relation with annoyance  As already shown in cited study Gden is well related to highly annoyed (HA)  Normalized Gden vs total percentage of HA: Notice that different mapping methodologies affect results We want to try to improve this relation finding groups of data within european exposure dataset. y = 0,0003e0,0921x R2 = 0,7475 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 50 55 60 65 70 75 Gden (dBA) %HA
  9. 9. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Groups within European dataset  There are large difference reported in shapes of exposure curves.  In other papers group of mapping data has been already highlighted;  In particular:  Germany curves are created based on national method of people distribution;  England maps are produced all by the same institute (DEFRA) so are all similar.  Here some type of curves will be identified according shape and ratio values between classes. M. van den Berg, G. Licitra EU-noise maps: Analysis of submitted data and comments Euronoise 2009, Edinburgh
  10. 10. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 >75 Lden [dBA] %ofpopulation 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 >75 Lden [dBA] %ofpopulation  72 monotonic decreasing  20 curves have less than 50% of population under 55 dB and more than 15% over 65 dB  46 curves have more than 50% of population under 55 dB and less than 15% over 65 dB (in this group there are 26 German cities) Exposure shapes [1] Decreasing >50% Decreasing <50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% < 55 dBA > 65 dBA %ofpopulation
  11. 11. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 >75 Lden [dBA] %ofpopulation 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 >75 Lden [dBA] %ofpopulation Exposure shapes [2]  45 with a single peak at 60-65 class  19 curves are England cities and they have more than 45% of population in peak class Peak shaped >45% Peak shaped <45%  All other 26 curves are smoother and are so distributed within countries:
  12. 12. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 50,0 55,0 60,0 65,0 70,0 75,0 Gden [dbA] %HA decreasing >50% decreasing <50% peak shaped >50% peak shaped <50% Relation with annoyance within groups  Gden vs %HA within identified groups Two groups don’t follow the trend line
  13. 13. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Relation with annoyance for countries  England and Germany are highlighted This is a better agreement that one considering whole sample (R2 =0.74) Gden(dBA) %HA
  14. 14. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Results & further analysis  Data shows that an exponential law relates Gden and %HA;  Therefore Gden can be used to evaluate health risks in a specific area/city.  Following map reports Gden values for European city:  National cluster can be observed.  Worst values are highlighted and city names reported.  Average values for each country
  15. 15. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Gden values for European cities
  16. 16. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Countries average values
  17. 17. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics National hot spots  Since national mapping methods influences Gden results, Gden could be used at least within region/country to evaluate worst situation and to assign funds to improve noise average quality. Gden(dBA) Gden(dBA)
  18. 18. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Mapping time evolution  Gden has been used also to evaluate improvements and mitigation actions along time;  It is a good indicator to evaluate also hypothetical actions and to understand global solution effectiveness;  It let policy makers understand average situation:  It is an indicator not only of noise quality but also of policies quality.  It could be useful also at local level to evaluate lower scale solutions and hot spots. J.Jabben, E.Verheijen, E. Schreurs Group Noise Exposure level Gden/Gnight; applications to airport noise Report RIVM 2010 (in Dutch)
  19. 19. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Local hot spots identification techniques  As already said, it is a long detailed activity and often it is hard to identify immediately worst situation without completing the whole project;  A lot of techniques are available and a study to compare them has been already carried out by authors;  Here a comparison between Gden and Qcity method is reported Notice that in this comparison number of inhabitants has been corrected for schools and hospital to reflect Italian laws E.Ascari, C.Chiari,P.Gallo, G.Licitra, D.Palazzuoli Comparison of methods to identify hot spots in Pisa Municipality AIA National Conference 2010 (in Italian)
  20. 20. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Comparison with Qcity method in Pisa  Probst proposed a method considering weighted levels (Ldenw) to reflect annoyance from different sources;  Noise Score(NS) is assigned based on inhabitants, using maximum over buildings;  Then a spatial average of values is carried out to reflect NS of that area (100 m radius). ( ) )(65L10.max den_w 50)-*(L0.15 den_w AdBifinhabNS building ≤∗= ( ) )(65L10.max den_w 57.5)-*(L0.30 den_w AdBifinhabitNS building >∗=
  21. 21. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Hot spots according Qcity method
  22. 22. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics  Gden levels haven’t been weighted in this study because we used directly total levels (road traffic is the main source).  Gden resolution depends on extension of aggregation areas available for each agglomeration, so here Italian census areas are used. Gden calculation in Pisa ↑ Rijnmond Area (NL) ↑ Pisa (IT)
  23. 23. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Hot spots according Gden method
  24. 24. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Comparison G.Licitra, P.Gallo, E.Rossi, G.Brambilla A novel method to determine multiexposure priority indices tested for Pisa action plan Applied Acoustics 72(8):6 (2011) Property Qcity Gden Resolution High Low Elaboration time Slow Fast Simplicity for public and policy makers Low High Response to developments and local changes Slow Fast Multiexposure correction introduced Yes To be done
  25. 25. AIA-DAGA 2013 conference on Acoustics Conclusions  Gden method is very simple to be implemented and also to be reported and explained to citizens;  It is useful to compare different cities and different countries and to establish common policies within Europe;  It is a method that it is robust along time and that allows comparisons based upon census units which are stable along time;  Improvements to Gden indicator to reflects annoyance due to multi-source exposure could be carried out in further studies.

×