To update the current state of evidence and assess its quality, we conducted a systematic review on the effects of environmental noise exposure on the cardio-metabolic systems as input for the new WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European Region. We identified 600 references relating to studies on effects of noise from road, rail and air traffic, and wind turbines on the cardio-metabolic system, published between January 2000 and August 2015. Only 61 studies, investigating different end points, included information enabling estimation of exposure response relationships. These studies were used for meta-analyses, and assessments of the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). A majority of the studies concerned traffic noise and hypertension, but most were cross-sectional and suffering from a high risk of bias. The most comprehensive evidence was available for road traffic noise and Ischeamic Heart Diseases (IHD). Combining the results of 7 longitudinal studies revealed a Relative Risk (RR) of 1.08 (95% CI: 1.01-1.15) per 10 dB (LDEN) for the association between road traffic noise and the incidence of IHD. We rated the quality of this evidence as high. Only a few studies reported on the association between transportation noise and stroke, diabetes, and/or obesity. The quality of evidence for these associations was rated from moderate to very low, depending on transportation noise source and outcome. For a comprehensive assessment of the impact of noise exposure on the cardiovascular and metabolic system, we need more and better quality evidence, primarily based on longitudinal studies.

/pdf/who-environmental-noise-guidelines-for-the-european-region-a-3ot4dtkly2.pdf

WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region: A Systematic Review on Environmental Noise and Cardiovascular and Metabolic Effects: A Summary.

To evaluate the quality of available evidence on the effects of environmental noise exposure on sleep a systematic review was conducted. The databases PSYCINFO, PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science and the TNO Repository were searched for non-laboratory studies on the effects of environmental noise on sleep with measured or predicted noise levels and published in or after the year 2000. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria. Seventy four studies predominately conducted between 2000 and 2015 were included in the review. A meta-analysis of surveys linking road, rail, and aircraft noise exposure to self-reports of sleep disturbance was conducted. The odds ratio for the percent highly sleep disturbed for a 10 dB increase in Lnight was significant for aircraft (1.94; 95% CI 1.61–2.3), road (2.13; 95% CI 1.82–2.48), and rail (3.06; 95% CI 2.38–3.93) noise when the question referred to noise, but non-significant for aircraft (1.17; 95% CI 0.54–2.53), road (1.09; 95% CI 0.94–1.27), and rail (1.27; 95% CI 0.89–1.81) noise when the question did not refer to noise. A pooled analysis of polysomnographic studies on the acute effects of transportation noise on sleep was also conducted and the unadjusted odds ratio for the probability of awakening for a 10 dBA increase in the indoor Lmax was significant for aircraft (1.35; 95% CI 1.22–1.50), road (1.36; 95% CI 1.19–1.55), and rail (1.35; 95% CI 1.21–1.52) noise. Due to a limited number of studies and the use of different outcome measures, a narrative review only was conducted for motility, cardiac and blood pressure outcomes, and for children’s sleep. The effect of wind turbine and hospital noise on sleep was also assessed. Based on the available evidence, transportation noise affects objectively measured sleep physiology and subjectively assessed sleep disturbance in adults. For other outcome measures and noise sources the examined evidence was conflicting or only emerging. According to GRADE criteria, the quality of the evidence was moderate for cortical awakenings and self-reported sleep disturbance (for questions that referred to noise) induced by traffic noise, low for motility measures of traffic noise induced sleep disturbance, and very low for all other noise sources and investigated sleep outcomes.

WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region: A Systematic Review on Environmental Noise and Effects on Sleep.

Of all the renewable energy sources (RESs)―except direct solar heat and light―wind energy is believed to have the least adverse environmental impacts. It is also one of the RES which has become economically affordable much before several other RESs have. As a result, next to biomass (and excluding large hydro), wind energy is the RES being most extensively tapped by the world at present. Despite carrying the drawback of intermittency, wind energy has found favor due to its perceived twin virtues of relatively lesser production cost and environment-friendliness. But with increasing use of turbines for harnessing wind energy, the adverse environmental impacts of this RES are increasingly coming to light. The present paper summarizes the current understanding of these impacts and assesses the challenges they are posing. One among the major hurdles has been the NYMBI (not in my backyard) syndrome due to which there is increasing emphasis on installing windfarms several kilometers offshore. But such moves have serious implications for marine life which is already under great stress due to impacts of overfishing, marine pollution, global warming, ozone hole and ocean acidification. Evidence is also emerging that the adverse impacts of wind power plants on wildlife, especially birds and bats, are likely to be much greater than is reflected in the hitherto reported figures of individuals killed per turbine. Likewise recent findings on the impact of noise and flicker generated by the wind turbines indicate that these can have traumatic impacts on individuals who have certain predispositions. But the greatest of emerging concerns is the likely impact of large wind farms on the weather, and possibly the climate. The prospects of wind energy are discussed in the backdrop of these and other rising environmental concerns.

http://www.sesync.org/sites/default/files/resources/Tabassum-Abbasi%20et%20al.%202014.pdf

Wind energy: Increasing deployment, rising environmental concerns

Co-benefits rarely enter quantitative decision-support frameworks, often because the methodologies for their integration are lacking or not known. This review fills in this gap by providing comprehensive methodological guidance on the quantification of co-impacts and their integration into climate-related decision making based on the literature. The article first clarifies the confusion in the literature about related terms and makes a proposal for a more consistent terminological framework, then emphasizes the importance of working in a multiple-objective–multiple-impact framework. It creates a taxonomy of co-impacts and uses this to propose a methodological framework for the identification of the key co-impacts to be assessed for a given climate policy and to avoid double counting. It reviews the different methods available to quantify and monetize different co-impacts and introduces three methodological frameworks that can be used to integrate these results into decision making. On the basis of an init...

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-environ-031312-125456

Measuring the Co-Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation

https://docs.wind-watch.org/Gone-with-wind-SERC-April-2014.pdf

Gone with the wind: valuing the visual impacts of wind turbines through house prices

https://pure.rug.nl/ws/files/6778721/Bakker_2012_Sci_Total_Environm.pdf

W. Lok

Papers

Impact of wind turbine sound on annoyance, self-reported sleep disturbance and psychological distress

Effects of wind turbine sound on health and psychological distress