[雙語翻譯]噪音污染外文翻譯--工作場所接觸人群的交通噪聲污染及態(tài)度評價(jià) （英文）

1、Atmospheric Environment 42 (2008) 3892–3898Short communicationEvaluation of traffic noise pollution and attitudes of exposed individuals in working placeVinita Pathak, B.D. Tripathi?, Virendra kumar MishraCentre for Envi

2、ronmental Science and Technology, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221005, IndiaReceived 24 October 2007; received in revised form 25 December 2007; accepted 25 December 2007AbstractThe main objective of this paper is

3、to evaluate the noise pollution problem in the Varanasi city and its effect on the exposed people. The study revealed the fact that noise levels have reached an alarming level. The result of the study indicated the fact

4、that 85% of the people were disturbed by traffic noise, about 90% of the people reported that traffic noise is the main cause of headache, high BP problem, dizziness and fatigue. People having higher education and income

5、 level are much aware of the health impact due to traffic noise. Marital status was found to be significantly affecting the annoyance level caused by traffic noise. Traffic noise was found to be interfering daily activit

6、ies such as at resting, reading, communication etc. r 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Keywords: Noise; Pollution; Traffic; Noise pollution level1. IntroductionTraffic noise is considered as one of the important so

7、urces of noise pollution that adversely affects human health (Aparicio et al., 1993; Lercher, 1995; Williams and Mc Creae, 1995). On densely traveled roads the equivalent sound pressure levels for 24 h can reach upto 75–

8、80 dB (Yoshida et al., 1997). Evidences indicate that noise pollution may have an adverse impact on human health (Georgiadou et al., 2004) and has been stated as a serious health hazard. Noise-related health hazards caus

9、e damage to humans ranging from annoyance to insanity and death (Mato and Mufuruki, 1999). Permanent hearing loss by long-term exposure to noise hasbeen reported by Nelson (1987). Noise effects may include annoyance, det

10、erioration of sleep quality and stress-related ischemic heart disease (Morrell et al., 1997). Franssen et al. (2002) showed that hypertension could be attributed to aircraft noise. Moreover, there have been some attempts

11、 to financially quantify the cost of damages to residen- tial areas and environment due to noise pollution (Levinson and Gillen, 1997; Theebe, 2004). Saadu et al. (1998) performed a noise survey study in Nigeria. Results

12、 from the eight cities surveyed showed that road traffic is the major source of noise pollution. Traffic is the dominating source of noise (Skan- berg and Ohrstrom, 2002) and is the major source of nuisance and annoyance

13、 as cited in social surveys by Pandya (2003). This has led researchers in many countries to investigate and characterize problemsARTICLE IN PRESSwww.elsevier.com/locate/atmosenv1352-2310/$ - see front matter r 2008 Elsev

14、ier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.12.070?Corresponding author. E-mail address: vinita_bhu@yahoo.co.in (B.D. Tripathi).their daily activity, which includes working, resting, conversation, reading,

15、talking on phone, etc.3. Result and discussion3.1. Noise level at different sampling sitesAnalysis of percentile values of noise indices (Leq, NC, Lnp) at different time intervals is given in Figs. 2–5. It can be conclud

16、ed from the results that most of the sampling sites were badly affected with traffic noise as these noise levels were higher when compared to the standards of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB, 1998) for differen

17、t area categories (Table 1). These findings are similar to those reported for other cities around the world in Italy, Brazil, Greece and India (Zannin et al., 2002; Georgiadou et al., 2004; Pandya, 2003). Among the diffe

18、rent sampling sites, the silence zone had values of different noise indices ranging between Leq 75.34dB (A), NC 24.3dB (A) and Lnp 99.64, and Leq 37dB (A), Lnp 46.8 dB (A), and 5.3 dB (A). Upper values were higher than t

19、he prescribed standards of CPCB (1998). In the commercial area, maximum Leq, i.e. 84.27 dB (A), NC, 19.4 dB (A) and Lnp 101.31dB (A), was recorded, while its minimum value was measured as Leq 46.9dB (A), NC 5.8 dB (A) an

20、d Lnp 40.6 dB (A). For the residential area, maximum Leq75.34 dB (A), NC 24.3 dB (A), Lnp 113.8dB (A) and minimum Leq 46.9 dB (A), NC 6.9dB (A) and Lnp 44.9 dB (A) were measured. In the industrial area, maximum Leq 70.3d

21、B (A), NC 11.8 dB (A), Lnp 87.1 dB (A) and minimum Leq 57.8dB (A), NC 6.9dB (A) and Lnp 65.2 dB (A) were recorded. The monitoring of different area categories showed that maximum noise level was recorded in the commercia

22、l area, followed by residential area, industrial area and silence zone. This result inter- estingly showed that industrial area has a lower value of noise in comparison to the residential area and silence zone, which is

23、an alarming signal for the local inhabitants. It also observed from the data that these noise levels were higher than the level reported for living room. The bed-room noise level of 25–30 dB (A), which exceeded at all sa

24、mpling sites during night time might result in more sleep disturbance due to noise. It should be noted that the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a noise level of o35 dB (A) based on continuous equal energy conc

25、ept for the restorative process of sleep (Mufuruki, 1997).3.2. Attitudes of the exposed people towards noiseThe age, marital status, education, mean income, maximum, minimum and standard deviation areARTICLE IN PRESS0204

26、060801001201234567891011121314151617181920MinimumMaximumAverageStan. Dev.Sampling sitesNoise level in dB(A)6-7 AM Leq 6-7 AM Lnp 6-7 AM NCFig. 2. Measurement of Leq, NC, Lnp at different sampling sites.V. Pathak et al. /