Nicole Porter - PSU Noisequest · Potential impact of night-time aircraft noise: Model framework Night-time aircraft noise ACUTE RESPONSES NEXT DAY EFFECTS CHRONIC EFFECTS Awakening,

© ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH & CONSULTANCY

Nicole PorterEnvironmental Research and ConsultancyDepartment (*previously DORA)UK Civil Aviation Authority


■ To review the effects of aircraft noise atnight-time

■ To explain the context of recent researchinto the effects of night-time aircraft noise

■ To consider future requirements


Framework model for night-time noise

CAA work and more recent US studies

New UK work and progress

Future research requirements to help

inform policy?


“ being woken in themiddle of the night is

the most terriblething for our family”

UK national newspapers

“The noise fromthese airplanes

is making me ill”

“The airlines have torealise just how bad

the problem is”

Potential impact of night-time aircraft noise: Model framework

Night-time aircraft

noise

ACUTERESPONSES

NEXT DAYEFFECTS

CHRONICEFFECTS

Awakening,increased SOL etc.

Other physiologicalresponses

Sleepiness

Performance decrements

Perceived health effects

Chronic annoyance

Reduced quality of life

Acute annoyance Perceivedsleep

disturbance

Tiredness &Mood

Short-termannoyance

Physical health effects

Mental health effects

MODIFYING FACTORS

Objective

Subjective

FEEDBACK / INTERACTION

TOTAL NIGHTEFFECTS

Slow-wavesleep loss

Reduction insleep duration

Sleepfragmentation

©Nicole Porter, UK CAA


Sleep is only part of the complex web

Most research has concentrated on sleep disturbance

This research is mainly based on awakenings

Most guidance and criteria for night-time is thereforebased on awakenings from sleep

But what has this research shown ?


The 1992 UK field study of sleep disturbance


< 75 75-79 80-84 85-89 90-94 95+0

2

4

6

8

10

Outdoor event SEL, dBA

Aro

usal

rate

, %

Arousal rate in quiet

Arousal rate in noise


At outdoor noise levels below 90 dB(A) SEL,average sleep disturbance rates were unlikelyto be affected and, at higher levels, the chanceof the average person being awakened by anaircraft noise event was about 1 in 75.


“But these findings arebiased, politically slanted,counter-intuitive, conflict withpublic perception becausepeople are woken up !”


Typical night in summer at Heathrow

Findings suggest that 8,700 awakenings

simplistic approach - does not taken into account a number of issues.


focussed on disturbance within sleep

relatively lower emphasis on perceivedsleep disturbance and public perception

meaning of noise not included

even so, do the key findings hold up today?



More recent studies broadly conveysame message: that, in the home,awakenings are infrequent and onlyweakly correlated with noise

Various guidelines are in broadagreement with the observations:sufficiently conservative to ensurelittle or no noise-induced awakenings



Annoyance due to noise

during the night-time

More peopleat home

Increased noticeability

Expectation of lower

noise levels

Attitudes/perceptions

Prevalence of noise

sensitive activities

Communicationinterference

(eve)

Sleep disturbance

(night)


Perceived impact of night-noise isGREATER than research suggestsbased on sleep disturbance workwhich shows that it is only a weakeffect

: there are gaps in knowledge


Long term: can night-time aircraftnoise lead to clinically significanthealth impairment (directly orindirectly)?

Need to disentangle intermediaterelationships


A - to ‘extend’ the 1992 FS to theshoulder hours

B - to compare sleep patterns in ‘highnoise’ and ‘low noise’ communities


C - to study sleep disturbance amongnoise sensitive people

D - to survey opinion of airportneighbours


Trial measurement study

Public attitude survey


Objective of the work

To evaluate the research options A-Cand to recommend the best way toproceed for any future full scale study ofsleep disturbance and other effects ofnight-time aircraft noise.


EEGActigraphyNext dayperformance(Psions)MSLT tests



In field work: differences in number ofawakenings, duration of stage 1 sleep,REM sleep; importance not yet clarified.In lab work: no difference in next dayeffects, reduced latencies, awarenesswhilst asleep; importance not yet clarifiedRecommendations: A-C all possible,should understand precise mechanismsbefore conducting a large scale study


A

Primary objective: to explore public perceptions of the effects ofaircraft noise at night.

Secondary objective: to inform a decision on whether more directmeasurement of sleep disturbance should bepursued in order to guide policies with regard tonight-time aircraft noise, and if so, which otherfactors should be taken into account and how.


Socio-demographic informationHome and community

Health and lifestyleGeneral wellbeing

SleepPerceived effects of noise

Attitudes to noiseAttitudes to aircraft noise


20-30% highly disturbed by noise inhigh noise areas20-30% report difficulties in going tosleep in high noise areasOver 60% perceive health to beaffectedLongitudinal studies recommendedfor establish causality


problem of night-time noise is complex

sleep disturbance and prevention is only part of thestory

awakenings from sleep is only part of that story

past research is robust but provides incomplete story

balance required between perceived disturbance andactual disturbance

still a long way to go to answer long term question ofwhether night-time aircraft noise can lead to healthimpairment


By day - principally annoyance

By night, a range of views, twoextremes:

● Physiological

● Psychological


Night -time physiological effects(most frequently researched)

��

��

��

People wake up because of aircraft noise?

Loss of sleep?

Next day effects?

Loss of performance or illness?


Evidence WEAK

Aircraft noise is a minor cause of sleepdisturbance

Little knowledge of links between actual andperceived disturbance

Likelihood of useful new results or aids topolicy very low


��

��

People suffer sleep disturbance for many reasons

Annoyance

Aircraft noise cited as cause because of its presence


Evidence STRONG

In highest aircraft exposure noise areas:

20-30% report highly disturbed

30-60% perceive health is affected

Annoyance greater where traffic has recentlyincreased


What Does the Public Think About CurrentAircraft Noise Policy and Its Research?

Leq(16-hr) assessments areinadequate/insufficientAircraft noise affects sleep and healthGovernment are not tackling real issues (e.g.Early morning arrivals at Heathrow)Research results are biased and counterintuitive

Economics gets ‘vote’ in policymaking ratherthan community’s environmental concerns

Attitudes have changed in last two decades – more up to date social survey work is required


Methods for quantifying noise exposure that

Provide a sound and defensible basis fornoise mitigation policies

Can potentially be used to set limits onaircraft operations at different times of theday and night

Are acceptable to both industry and thepublic

Maintain continuity from past policy andcompatibility with international guidance


Have a practical application focus basedon scientifically robust research

Focus on the stronger link - thepsychological one - to target key issues ofconcern to affected populations

Establish relationships between index andpublic noise perceptions - annoyance andacceptability

Involve public


� Meeting the need to address public views� Considering changes in public attitudes

after 2 decades� Not duplicating well-understood research� Focusing on policy value� Minimising costs by eliminating

physiological aspects of weak value

Documents

Nicole Porter - PSU Noisequest · Potential impact of night-time aircraft noise: Model framework Night-time aircraft noise ACUTE RESPONSES NEXT DAY EFFECTS CHRONIC EFFECTS Awakening,