Støjhandlingsplaner - formidling og troværdighed

Mange kommuner og en række andre myndigheder arbejder med støjhandlingsplaner. Uanset størrelsen af de ressourcer, der er afsat til processen og til støjbegrænsende tiltag, er der brug for inspiration til formidling af de teknisk komplicerede støjforhold. Der er nemlig ikke nogen let gennemskuelig sammenhæng mellem den måde vi teknisk beskriver støj, og den måde mennesker oplever støjen i deres miljø. F.eks. er trafikstøjen ikke konstant selvom vi arbejder med gennemsnitsværdier. Ny forskning peger på, at kvaliteten af lydmiljøet på en boligs stille side kan have overraskende stor betydning for oplevelsen af støj fra trafikken på boligens anden side. Det er et vigtigt element i forståelse af borgernes oplevelser og giver muligheder for nye metoder til begrænsning af gener fra trafikstøj. Indlægget beskriver de formelle krav til en støjhandlingsplan, der udarbejdes i henhold til Miljøstyrelsens vejledning, Støjkortlægning og støjhandlingsplaner. Der lægges dog særlig vægt på gennem en række eksempler at beskrive de udfordringer, der skal håndteres for at opnå en troværdig formidling af støjforhold og metoder til begrænsning af støj. Der er ikke let at forklare den logaritmiske decibelskala og der er mange myter om metodernes effekt (asfalt kan være ”støjsvag”, støjskærme ”fjerner” støjen). Håndteres udfordringerne ikke, kan troværdigheden af en støjhandlingsplan blive sat under pres og der kan opstå konflikter mellem forventninger og den opnåede effekt, når støjdæmpningen er udført. Indlægget vil give en række forslag til, hvordan udfordringen kan løftes. Der vil blive trukket på konkret erfaringer fra formidling af trafikstøj, men også fra en række andre områder, f.eks. støj i arbejdsmiljøet og lydforhold i boliger

Road Traffic Noise and Incident Myocardial Infarction: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND Both road traffic noise and ambient air pollution have been associated with risk for ischemic heart disease, but only few inconsistent studies include both exposures. METHODS In a population-based cohort of 57 053 people aged 50 to 64 years at enrolment in 1993-1997, we identified 1600 cases of first-ever MI between enrolment and 2006. The mean follow-up time was 9.8 years. Exposure to road traffic noise and air pollution from 1988 to 2006 was estimated for all cohort members from residential address history. Associations between exposure to road traffic noise and incident MI were analysed in a Cox regression model with adjustment for air pollution (NO(x)) and other potential confounders: age, sex, education, lifestyle confounders, railway and airport noise. RESULTS We found that residential exposure to road traffic noise (L(den)) was significantly associated with MI, with an incidence rate ratio IRR of 1.12 per 10 dB for both of the two exposure windows: yearly exposure at the time of diagnosis (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02-1.22) and 5-years time-weighted mean (95% CI: 1.02-1.23) preceding the diagnosis. Visualizing of the results using restricted cubic splines showed a linear dose-response relationship. CONCLUSIONS Exposure to long-term residential road traffic noise was associated with a higher risk for MI, in a dose-dependent manner

Exposure to road traffic and railway noise and associations with blood pressure and self-reported hypertension: a cohort study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Epidemiological studies suggest that long-term exposure to transport noise increases the risk for cardiovascular disorders. The effect of transport noise on blood pressure and hypertension is uncertain.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In 1993-1997, 57,053 participants aged 50-64 year were enrolled in a population-based cohort study. At enrolment, systolic and diastolic blood pressure was measured. Incident hypertension during a mean follow-up of 5.3 years was assessed by questionnaire. Residential long-term road traffic noise (L_den) was estimated for 1- and 5-year periods preceding enrolment and preceding diagnosis of hypertension. Residential exposure to railway noise was estimated at enrolment. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of associations between road traffic and railway noise and blood pressure at enrolment with linear regression, adjusting for long-term air pollution, meteorology and potential lifestyle confounders (N = 44,083). Incident self-reported hypertension was analyzed with Cox regression, adjusting for long-term air pollution and potential lifestyle confounders.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found a 0.26 mm Hg higher systolic blood pressure (95% confidence intervals (CI): -0.11; 0.63) per 10 dB(A) increase in 1-year mean road traffic noise levels, with stronger associations in men (0.59 mm Hg (CI: 0.13; 1.05) per 10 dB(A)) and older participants (0.65 mm Hg (0.08; 1.22) per 10 dB(A)). Road traffic noise was not associated with diastolic blood pressure or hypertension. Exposure to railway noise above 60 dB was associated with 8% higher risk for hypertension (95% CI: -2%; 19%, P = 0.11).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>While exposure to road traffic noise was associated with systolic blood pressure in subgroups, we were not able to identify associations with hypertension.</p

Baseline characteristics by incident myocardial infarction status and by baseline exposure to road traffic noise below and above 60 dB (L_den).

<p>Values are medians (5–95 percentiles) unless otherwise stated.</p>a<p>Among present and former smokers.</p

Association between road traffic noise and myocardial infarction.

<p>Association between exposure to road traffic noise (L_den) at the residence at the time of diagnosis and incident MI, adjusted for sex, smoking status, smoking duration, smoking intensity, intake of fruit, vegetables and alcohol, BMI, physical activity, calendar year, education, railway and airport noise, and air pollution. Solid line: incidence rate ratio, dashed lines: 95% confidence interval. The median (56.4 dB) is the reference. The columns at the x-axis show the distribution of exposure to road traffic noise.</p

Modification of associations between yearly road traffic at the residential address at time of diagnosis and risk for incident MI by baseline characteristics and age at diagnosis.

<p>IRR, incidence rate ratio; CI, confidence interval; dB, decibel.</p>a<p>Adjusted for age, sex, lifestyle confounders (smoking status, smoking duration, smoking intensity, intake of fruit, vegetables and alcohol, BMI and physical activity), calendar year, education, railway and airport noise, and air pollution (NO_x).</p