Quiet-List 1997

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Measuring noise

On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, STEPHEN O. FRAZIER wrote:

> Eric.......
> I agree that distance may establish a point of reference to make the
> reading more meaningful, but readings can have meaning without any distance
> annotation. The use of the word "meaningful" both by you and by Peter is
> what gives me a problem with your statements.
> The hypothetical traffic reading of 80 dB is quite meaningful if taken at a
> person's property line.  It doesn't matter if the road is parallel and
> adjacent to that line or a 1/2 mile away.  80 dB could be a violation of

  Ah... but you must concede that 80 dB is quite meaningless without a 
*reference point*. That reference point may be a property line or distance.
Linking 80 dB to a property line means that no matter how loud the source 
of noise, nor how far it is from the property line; it must not be 
greater than 80 dB at the property line.
  The other way to give meaning to a decibel number is to link it to a 
  When there is no reference point the dBs become absurd. I've seen far too 
much literature saying that a jet is rated at 120 dB etc. If everyone heard 
jets flying over their houses at 120 dB we'd start shooting them down from 
the skies.

> Canada.  If there are such standards and regulations there, possibly they
> should be adopted over here to encourage the development of global
> standards. I recall a recent posting to the Quiet List by an individual
> from one of the Scandinavian countries.  Possibly the person can tell us
> something about this matter.


 Eric Greenspoon 
  President - NoiseWatch

QUIET-LIST:   Internet Mail List and Forum for discussion of Noise Pollution,
Soundscape Awareness, and the Right to Quiet.     Email: "quiet-list@igc.org"
To subscribe, email "majordomo@igc.org" with message "subscribe quiet-list".
For info, send message "info quiet-list" to same.

Home | Date Index | Subject Index