1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Response to noise from modern wind farms in The Netherlands
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1121/1.3160293
/content/asa/journal/jasa/126/2/10.1121/1.3160293
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/asa/journal/jasa/126/2/10.1121/1.3160293

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Proportion of respondents in each sound immission interval who noticed sound from wind turbines outside their dwelling (left column) or were annoyed by it (right column); [(A) and (B)] comparison between respondents who benefited economically and those who did not; [(C) and (D)] comparison between respondents who could see at least one wind turbine from their dwelling and those who could not; [(E)–(F)] comparison between respondents living in built-up areas, rural areas with a main road, and rural areas without a main road. , , (Mann–Whitney U-test), vs rural with main road, with main road vs rural without main road, and vs rural without main road.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Proportions of respondents annoyed (a) and very annoyed (b) by wind turbine noise outside their dwellings in four sound level intervals in the Dutch study (only respondents who did not benefit economically, ) and the Swedish studies , with 95% confidence intervals.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Proportion of respondents annoyed (a) and very annoyed (b) by wind turbine noise outside their dwellings (only respondents who did not benefit economically, ) compared to the modeled response [(A) percentage annoyed and (B) percentage highly annoyed] to noise from road traffic, aircraft, and railways (Miedema and Oudshoorn, 2001) and from industry and shunting yards (Miedema and Vos, 2004). For wind turbine noise the median of sound immission levels in each 5-dB interval is at the abscissa.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Study sample, number of respondents, and response rate according to 5-dB(A) sound level interval.

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Response to wind turbine noise outdoors or indoors, proportion of respondents according to 5-dB(A) sound level intervals, and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI).

Generic image for table
TABLE III.

Description of possible moderating variables in relation to 5-dB(A) sound level intervals: proportion of respondents per sound level interval and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) for subjective variables.

Generic image for table
TABLE IV.

Results of two logistic regression models using the response variables do not notice/notice and not annoyed/annoyed, respectively; the exposure variable sound pressure level (continuous scale) and situational factors were used as moderating variables .

Generic image for table
TABLE V.

Correlations between sound pressure levels, response (five-point scale from “do not notice” to “very annoyed”), and subjective variables; Spearman’s rank correlation test.

Generic image for table
TABLE VI.

Results of a logistic regression model with the response variables not annoyed/annoyed, the exposure variable sound pressure level (continuous scale), and individual factors as moderating variables .

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/asa/journal/jasa/126/2/10.1121/1.3160293
2009-08-01
2014-04-21
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Response to noise from modern wind farms in The Netherlands
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/asa/journal/jasa/126/2/10.1121/1.3160293
10.1121/1.3160293
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM