Advertisement

A method to include in lca road traffic noise and its health effects

  • Ruedi Müller-Wenk
LCA Methodology

Abstract

Background, Aims and Scope

Transport noise represents an environmental problem that is perceived by humans more directly than the usual chemical emissions or resource uses. In spite of this, traditional LCA applications still exclude noise — probably due to the unavailability of an appropriate assessment method. In order to fill the gap, this article presents a study proposing a new computational procedure for the determination of health impairment resulting from noise emissions of road vehicles.

Main Features

The magnitude of health impairment due to noise is determined separately for each vehicle class (cars, trucks,..) and is calculated per vehicle-kilometre driven during the day or at nighttime on the Swiss road network. This health impairment is expressed in cases of sleep disturbance or communication disturbance, and furthermore aggregated in DALY (Disability Adjusted Life Years) units representing the number, duration and severity of the health cases. The method is modelling the full cause-effect chain from the noise emissions of a single vehicle up to the health damage. As in some other modern concepts of environmental damage assessment, the analysis is subdivided into the four modules of fate analysis, exposure analysis, effect analysis and damage analysis. The fate analysis yielding the noise level increment due to an additional road transport over a given distance is conducted for transports with known or with unknown routing, the latter case being more important in LCA practice. The current number of persons subject to specific background levels of noise is determined on the basis of the road traffic noise model, LUK, developed by the Swiss canton of Zurich. The number of additional cases of health impairment due to incremental noise is calculated with data out of the Swiss Noise Study 90. An assessment of the severity of sleep disturbance and communication disturbance, in comparison to other types of health impairment, was performed by a panel consisting of physicians experienced in the field of severity weighting of disabilities.

Results and Discussion

The quantities of health cases and of DALY units are given per 1′000 truck or car kilometres on Swiss roads, and the range of the confidence interval is estimated. A plausibility check is made by a quantitative comparison of the results with health damage due to traffic accidents in Switzerland, and with health damage due to traffic noise in the Netherlands.

Conclusions and Oudook

The method is ready for use in LCA practice. However, the temporary solution for transports outside of Switzerland should be replaced by feeding country specific data into the fate and exposure model. Further, a comparable assessment for rail transport would facilitate decisions on road or rail transport. A decisive element of transport noise assessment is the availability of robust links between noise level and medical conditions. Whilst the number of the corresponding studies is sufficiendy large, a design for better pooling of study results is desirable.

Keywords

Communication disturbance DALY disability adjusted life years dose-effect characteristics exposure-response relationship interference with speech communication noise effects road traffic noise sleep disturbance vehicle noise 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BFS (2002): Bundesamt für Statistik BfS: Umwelt Schweiz 2002 — Statistiken und Analysen, Neuchâtel 2002Google Scholar
  2. De Hollander (1999): De Hollander AEM et al.: An Aggregate Public Health Indicator to Represent the Impact of Multiple Environmental Exposures, Epidemiology 10, 606–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Eurostat (1995): Europe’s Environment, Statistical Compendium, Luxembourg 1995Google Scholar
  4. Gorree (2000): Gorree M, Guinee JB Huppes G van Oers L: Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Linoleum — Final Report, Report No 151, CML Leiden 2000. Available for download through http://Leidenuniv.nl/interfac/cmlGoogle Scholar
  5. Guinee (2000): Guinée JB et al.:Life Cycle Assessment — An operational guide to the ISO Standards, Part 2a (Guide), Final Report May 2001. Available for download through http://www. Leidenuniv.nl/interfac/cml/lca2/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
  6. Kabuto (2002): Kabuto M: A dose-response between nighttime indoor sound level due to road traffics and risk for insomnia in Japan, Article 50389233-2002/14, Presented at the WHO technical meeting on exposure-response relationships of noise on health, September 11th, 2002Google Scholar
  7. Lafleche (1997): Lafleche V, Sacchetto F: Noise Assessment in LCA — A Methodology Attempt, Int J LCA 2, 111–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Maibach (1995): Maibach M et al.: ökoinventar Transporte — Technischer Schlussbericht, INFRAS Zürich, 1995 (ISBN 3-9520824-5-7)Google Scholar
  9. Maschke (2001): Maschke C, Hecht K, Wolf U: Nächtliches Erwachen durch Fluglärm. In: Bundesgesundheitsbl — Gesund-heitsforsch — Gesundheitsschutz 44, 1001–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Miedema (1998): Miedema HME, Vos H: Exposure-response relationships for transportation noise, J. Acoust. Soc. Am 104, 3432–3445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Müller-Wenk (2002): Müller-Wenk R: Attribution to road traffic of the impact of noise on health, Environmental Series no. 339, BUWAL Berne 2002. Available for download through www, buwalshop.chGoogle Scholar
  12. Murray (1996): Murray Ch et al.: The Global Burden of Disease, World Health Organisation, Geneva 1996Google Scholar
  13. Oliva (1998): Oliva C: Belastungen der Bevölkerung durch Flugund Strassenlärm, Berlin 1998Google Scholar
  14. SAEFL (1991): BUWAL: Strassenlärmmodell für überbaute Gebiete, SRU No.15, Bern 1991Google Scholar
  15. StatJB (2000): Bundesamt für Statistik: Statistisches Jahrbuch 2000 der Schweiz, Bern 2000Google Scholar
  16. Stouthard (1997): Stouthard MEA et al.: Disability Weights for Diseases in the Netherlands, Rotterdam 1997Google Scholar
  17. UBA (2003): Maschke C et al.: Epidemiologische Untersuchungen zum Einfluss von Lärmstress auf das Immunsystem und die Entstehung von Arteriosklerose, WaBoLu 01-03, Umweltbundesamt, Berlin 2003Google Scholar
  18. VGDHS (1999): Victorian Government Department of Human Services: Victorian Burden of Disease Study — Morbidity, Melbourne 1999, http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/phd/9903009/index.htmGoogle Scholar
  19. WHO (2000): Guidelines for Community Noise, World Health Organisation, Geneva 2000Google Scholar
  20. WHO (2002): The World Health Report 2002, World Health Organisation, Geneva 2002, downloadable from http://www. who.int/whr/enGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Ecomed Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut f Wirtschaft u OekologieUniversity of St.GallenGallen

Personalised recommendations