Introduction
As the world’s nations continue to scale the heights of development, they inevitably have to grapple with the negative side of the advancements realized therein. Among such consequences is the problem of environmental pollution. The battle against environmental pollution has brought together international bodies, governments at the national level, and organizations within countries. However, the trends indicate that the harder the battle is fought, the more serious the issues of concern become.
Environmental pollution is a multifaceted concept that is constituted by a plethora of independent aspects. One of these aspects, which continue to dominate debates across the entire world, is noise pollution. As cities expand to accommodate their ever-increasing activities, so does noise from all sorts of sources increase. This essay examines noise pollution and distinguishes it from sound pollution with a focus on urban traffic noise.
Noise Pollution in Perspective
Existing literature is awash with different approaches to the definition of noise and consequently noise pollution. However, of importance is that the approach notwithstanding, noise bears one characteristic that qualifies any sound to be considered as noise. It tends to impair communication between two parties (Schafer, 1994). In other words, noise is any sound that irritates ears and by doing so, hinders ears from capturing projected sound adequately. In light of this insight, noise pollution is thus the existence of sounds that combine to inflict pain on ears continuously, thus causing discomfort to the listener. This assertion means that in a polluted acoustic environment, any two parties wishing to communicate will do so under some level of strain and the chances of the message being distorted are very high.
Noise pollution has been found to have several adverse effects on the health and well-being of man. Its effects range from damaging ears to have a causal effect on some complex health conditions that have been witnessed in some people. To begin with, noise pollution causes reduced working efficiency as noted by Kryter (1970).
When two groups of people are placed in noisy and non-noisy environments and assigned the same tasks, those in a quieter environment will tend to be slightly more productive than those in a noisy environment. This aspect could be attributed to the fact that noise pollution causes distraction and as such, slows down a worker in a noisy environment. The distraction in most cases is undesirable, but the victims cannot help it since they have to divide their attention to a given extent between the noise and the task. The disparity could be up to 12% improved efficiency for those working in a generally quiet environment (Kryter, 1970).
In addition to affecting the efficiency of a worker, noise can also affect the reaction time of an individual to visual stimuli (Kryter, 1970). If noise is persistently availed and the individual is presented with visual stimuli to react to, the noise may cause the individual to lengthen the reaction time, the individual may also react too fast to such stimuli or get used to the noise and not be affected at all (Kryter, 1970).
The three instances of noise affecting the reaction of the individual may not be desirable during certain circumstances. An individual’s ability to react to stimuli should not be interfered with in any way. The danger posed by altering an individual’s reaction time can be appreciated better in circumstances where the stimulus that necessitates the reaction can cause fatal injury to the victim. The victim may end up suffering serious injuries or dying prematurely.
Besides these two, noise also has an effect on the learning of an individual so that it distracts the individual in a way that s/he is not able to learn, as would be the case in a quiet environment. In a study by Kryter (1970), the individuals used a lot of muscular effort, and their breathing was accelerated too in the presence of noise, as compared to quiet environments.
This study clearly shows that noise may have a non-desirable effect on the speed of learning because even if an individual learns, there is a time difference in the individual learning from a quiet environment and the one in a noisy one. Fast learners are considered intelligent, and most education systems tend to favor such individuals. The effect of noise can thus lead to the classification of some individuals as being less intelligent when in actual sense they are victims of a noise-polluted environment.
Kryter (1970) further noted that noise affected the intelligence of an individual so that when an intelligence test score was taken in a noisy environment, it had a detrimental effect on the results. This observation can be attributed to the fact that noise interferes with the ability to concentrate, as would be the case in a quiet surrounding. Studies carried out to find out if the noise had a bearing on the mental and muscular effort exerted while undertaking a task also indicated that there was a negative effect (Kryter, 1970).
There was an increase in speed by up to 4.3% for typists working in relatively quiet environments and what is more surprising is that they consumed less oxygen by up to 19% less than their counterparts working in a noisy environment (Kryter, 1970). Although some indications suggested otherwise, it was notably clear that noise indeed had an effect on the muscular and mental effort exerted to accomplish a task.
These examples are clear testimonies to the effect that noise can have on human beings. Although there are instances of noise showing a positive effect, the magnitude of such effects is negligible, if compared to the cases in its negative effects (OECD, 1991). However, an important point to note is that whether the effects are negative, which is mostly the case, or positive, studies demonstrate beyond any doubt that noise pollution will, in one way or another, affect an individual’s perception of his or her surroundings and that is not desirable.
The distinction between Noise and Sound Pollution
The preceding parts of the essay extensively dealt with noise pollution, but at this point, there is a need to develop a clear distinction between these two concepts. Sound refers to stimulation caused in ears by the vibration of any surrounding medium. Sound pollution is thus any departure of this sensation from its desirable quality. Based on the manner in which the two terms are used in everyday activities, it is almost impossible to alienate one from the other, yet the two terms mean two distinct things. Therefore, noise is a type of sound whose effect is always undesirable to a listener. In reference to traffic, not all forms of sound produced by traffic can be classified as noise. Only those that in one way or another cause discomfort to individuals’ ears qualify as noise.
This essay is focused on traffic noise in urban settings; therefore, it is important to understand the various forms of sounds that emanate from traffic and what qualifies them as noise pollution from the onset. It should be clear at this point that it is not possible to mention noise without touching on sound because noise is a certain type of sound, but one can easily examine sound without necessarily touching on noise. This distinction should help in the succeeding part of the deliberations of this essay.
In an urban setting, traffic is inevitable for motorists are part of the economy of any setting. Some cities have attempted to tackle the problem of excessive numbers of motor vehicles by touting bicycles as alternatives with considerable success. However, this move is not possible everywhere; therefore, traffic noise will always be a problem to be solved. Among the many forms of sound produced by vehicles, the following can be classified as noise; the honking of horns, the squealing of tires, sirens, raving engines, and banging doors among others. These examples do not exhaust the list, but outline some of the most common sounds that emanate from traffic.
Several reasons underscore why sounds can be classified as noise and thus eventually cause noise pollution. The unexpectedness of a particular form of sound may qualify it as noise due to the annoying effect that this scenario causes the listener (Kryter, 1970). When a driver suddenly steps on the brake pedal to avert an impending accident, the squealing of tires may cause an annoying effect to a listener who may not be watching the scene, and s/he is thus caught off-guard by the sound. The case may be slightly different for a person who watches the scene from beginning to end because for him or she, the squealing of the tires is registered in mind as being necessary under such circumstances. The distinction between sound and noise is thus evident in the perception of the same sound by the two individuals.
The intensity and loudness of a sound qualify it as noise even in circumstances where it is clearly known that it is necessary. A police or ambulance siren may be anticipated at any time, but still, it irritates people due to its intensity and loudness. The loudness is necessary for traffic to clear the way, especially in the case of an ambulance, but this element makes it more undesirable to the listener. The more intense a sound is, the more irritating it is (Rosen et al., 1962). When the sound of an ambulance siren is compounded by the rave of its engine and honking horns, the sounds form a typical scenario of traffic noise in an urban setting, and this is what forms noise pollution from traffic.
In addition to these two, another quality of sound that makes it qualify as noise and thus pollute the acoustic environment is its inappropriateness (Truax, 2001). In an environment where quietness and calm are desired, when there is penetration by sound from a given source, it is immediately considered noise, and thus it serves to pollute that environment. This scenario happens when the peace and quietness that initially prevailed are destabilized by the sudden presence of undesired sound.
A good example of this scenario is in school or library buildings that are proximate to roads. Although the designers incorporate sound absorbing elements to muffle any noise that may interfere with students or readers, sound may still penetrate as noise to cause disturbance and discomfort based on its loudness and intensity. The idea of the inappropriateness of the sound in these settings stems from the fact that these places require total quietness so that when a tire squeal gets to the ear of a learner who is trying to internalize a concept; it tends to draw the learner’s attention to an unnecessary occurrence.
This discussion clearly indicates that noise pollution occurs when a non-desired sound penetrates a given acoustic space but fails to give instances in which it can be said that sound pollution has occurred. At this point, sound pollution shall thus be briefly put into perspective. In reference to traffic noise, it may not be possible to construct the idea of sound pollution clearly, for the way traffic sounds come out is not anyone’s concern. Sound pollution can clearly be examined under conditions where the quality of a sound being produced is of concern to the listener; for instance, in music. In music, a singer, a producer, and a listener are all concerned with the quality of the sound produced. This assertion means that anything that affects the sound so that it does not come out as it should is polluting the sound.
This can best be understood from a mechanical perspective where the sound is viewed as the wave. Therefore, when there is interference with the wavelength or amplitude of a sound wave in any way, it changes from how it is expected to sound to a different form of sound, which may not be desirable by a listener. This scenario underscores how sound pollution takes place. It can be seen that sound and noise pollution are two distinct concepts, but what should be noted even at this point is that the polluted sound becomes noise.
Conclusion
Urban traffic noise may not necessarily cause any form of sound pollution because no one pays attention to the difference between how certain sounds should come out and how they do come out. The quality of sound seems to matter only in music and other instances such as auditions where the quality of an individual’s vocals determines his or her suitability for a particular task. The case is different in normal life situations where the quality of sound does not matter because it seems not to add any value to the acoustic environment. For instance, a tire squeal may not concern anyone at all apart from the fact that it may announce an emergency of some sort.
When a vehicle suddenly stops, it implies that either an accident has occurred or it nearly occurred. The quality of the sound produced by the tire squeal may not concern anyone at all. Traffic noise thus exclusively amounts to noise pollution in any environment including habitually noisy environments. However, ways of reducing the risk posed by noise pollution to human health should be sought because whether in a habitually noisy environment or a quiet one, noise pollution still affects human health. Polluted sound translates to noise, which makes it equally dangerous to human health, and thus it should be avoided.
Reference List
Kryter, K. (1970). The effects of noise on man. New York, NY: Academic Press. Web.
OECD. (1991). Fighting noise in the nineties. Paris, France: OECD Publications. Web.
Rosen, S., Bergman, M., Plester, D., El-Mofty, A., & Satti, M. (1962). Presbycusis study in a relatively noise free population in the Sudan. The Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology, 71, 727-43. Web.
Schafer, R. M. (1994).The Soundscape: Our Sonic Environment and the Tuning of the World. Rochester, VA: Destiny Books. Web.
Truax, B. (2001). Acoustic Communication. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. Web.