[HN Gopher] Traffic noise hurts children's brains
___________________________________________________________________
Traffic noise hurts children's brains
Author : rntn
Score : 85 points
Date : 2024-06-23 19:20 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
| globular-toast wrote:
| > "The guidelines don't [mention] fluctuations and peaks. Every
| time there is a noise peak, it is a distraction which can affect
| children's attention [span] and working memory,"
|
| This is the worst part, I think. Rail and aircraft are at least
| predictable and, presumably, no louder than they have to be. But
| all it takes is one asshole with a loud car or motorbike and
| hundreds or even thousands of people are disturbed. Why are these
| bastards allowed to continue with ever louder motors? How do
| people live with it? Do they not realise that it _could_ be
| quiet? This is something we could choose to have quite easily.
| rustcleaner wrote:
| My proposed fix is to make speeding ticket funds NOT EVER go to
| local governments, pass vehicle noise limits comparable to last
| decade's new vehicles stock (with fat paycheck busting fines),
| pass every cop a handheld combination laser range
| finder/parabolic decibel meter/video camera enforcement
| device/"gun," and make the fines go totally to local
| government. 3rd time or intentional over-100 decibel should be
| crusher (with no loan discharge) for the car and five years in
| the clink for felony disturbing the peace.
|
| No more loud fucklechucks! :^)
| rustcleaner wrote:
| Oh and motorcycles at full rev must be made as quiet as a VW
| TDI. Thank Harley Davidson and his customers!
| ZoomerCretin wrote:
| Why should speeding ticket funds not go to local governments?
| Noise may be damaging, but to a much lower degree than a
| violent death by car crash which speed limits reduce.
| erikaww wrote:
| Why the crusher? Just repo it or take all the expensive parts
| out. Then give that money to schools or use it to fund
| putting out cameras to automate traffic enforcement
| spinach wrote:
| Also why are lawn mowers so loud and not made to be quieter in
| some way? Why does everyone need to cut their lawn in the first
| place?
| akira2501 wrote:
| From the Barcelona study linked in the article:
|
| "Conclusions We observed that exposure to road traffic noise at
| school, but not at home, was associated with slower development
| of working memory, complex working memory, and attention in
| schoolchildren over 1 year. Associations with noise fluctuation
| indicators were more evident than with average noise levels in
| classrooms."
|
| So, at the very least, the title of the original article does not
| seem justified. In fact the whole article comes off like a bad
| internet argument, tons of links that aren't understood, and the
| whole thing is designed to reach a pretermined conclusion, which
| is, of course:
|
| "Car-free zones The best way to protect children from excessive
| noise is by reducing traffic around schools, says Foraster. "
|
| I mean. Why not just sound proof class rooms? Seems way easier
| than entirely reengineering traffic in a dense urban environment.
| This really feels like "think of the kids!" now applied to
| traffic.
| rustcleaner wrote:
| You just know this is sponsored Walkable City(tm) SEO-slop.
| lovethevoid wrote:
| Because it's not just class rooms, although those are places
| you want them to be at their peak. It's just the easiest to
| consistently test.
|
| Additionally, with how severely under funded education is,
| you're not going to get much effective sound proofing. Most
| classrooms can't even afford regular maintenance.
| xnyan wrote:
| >We observed that exposure to road traffic noise at school, but
| not at home, was associated with slower development of working
| memory, complex working memory, and attention in schoolchildren
| over 1 year
|
| Pretend I'm dumb, why is this not a bad thing?
|
| >Why not just sound proof class rooms? Seems way easier than
| entirely reengineering traffic in a dense urban environment.
|
| I see it completely the other way. Reductions in the maximum
| allowed speed in the direct area around the school to archive
| the target noise maximum would be far more efficient than sound
| mitigation for the school.
| jajko wrote:
| I have even better idea, since your doesn't cover biggest
| noise polluters IMHO - have a technical check on the car/bike
| that includes noise levels above certain threshold. Now I
| realize there may be corner cases and so on, but in general
| this would work wonders and so far I see 0 being done there.
| The thing is, certain cars and many motorbikes simply can't
| be quiet regardless of rpms, even in 30kmh they wake many
| people up through closed window.
|
| As somebody who lived just next to very busy street for few
| years, there are 2, or maybe 3 main noise pollutants in the
| order of intensity: 1) ambulances & police, they are really
| properly mental level and they don't care even on completely
| empty 3am streets, if I don't cover my ears when they pass me
| it physically hurts, even with my subpar hearing of higher
| frequencies; 2) motorbikes like choppers by default, and all
| tuned rest, aka Akrapovic and similar mods should be banned
| in inner cities, permanently, 24/7. And 3) sports cars
| obviously, but they posed the least problem even in uber rich
| place like Geneva where seeing a Ferrari or McLaren is not
| unusual, and nobody looks at Porsche or below. This goes also
| for performance variants of ie BMW, Mercs or Audis too in
| lesser way.
| karaterobot wrote:
| This article definitely flipped my "let's assume this is
| bullshit until proven otherwise" bit. That bit really ought to
| be on by default, come to think of it.
|
| I think about this quote when reading articles like this (to
| say nothing of the research it draws on):
|
| > The best way to identify sketchy scientific claims is by
| their level of abstraction.... if a new paper claims that
| attractive people are more (or less) generous than ugly people,
| I would be highly suspicious. "Generosity" is a very abstract
| and nebulous quality, and I would want to know how it was
| measured...The profound abstractions of everyday life--
| happiness, relationships, sleep, nutrition, motivation, pain,
| belonging--are the concepts most vulnerable to scientific
| abuse. (https://worksinprogress.co/issue/how-trust-undermines-
| scienc...)
|
| The phrase "hurts children's brains" seems almost ludicrously
| abstract to me, so it's a little suspicious from the get go.
|
| Then I get to their examples. The example of a train track
| literally running next to a classroom is one thing--I can see
| that being a problem--but it's a bit different than being next
| to a city street, which is where the article immediately
| pivots. Is the average classroom so loud that people physically
| cannot concentrate? Quoting studies that say that loud
| classrooms affect student performance doesn't demonstrate that
| most classrooms _are_ too loud to concentrate, and that
| anything needs to be done about it. And even if classrooms in
| Barcelona are all too loud to concentrate, that says nothing
| about classrooms anywhere else--not even anywhere else in
| Spain, let alone the entire world. Blegh.
| kiba wrote:
| Noise pollution affecting children(or adults) in negatives
| ways is not an exactly an original claim that the paper make
| nor is it the first one to say so.
|
| It would be like a paper claiming that exercise is good for
| you, which is heavily supported by robust evidence and
| mountain of papers.
| kiba wrote:
| Car dependency and car related infrastructure are enormously
| expensive to society. Think of every parking lots needed for
| people to park their car, motor accident, tire, noise, CO2
| pollution, materials needed for repaving and repairing road
| damage, etc.
|
| Soundproofing sounds cheaper, but it's just another additional
| cost imposed by cars.
|
| The sooner we are able to walk or cycle or use public transit,
| the better off we are collectively for many reasons.
| t-writescode wrote:
| Two of the best parts, to me, about electric cars are:
|
| 1) lower pollution where people live, so you can go for runs and
| such without breathing in a bunch of noxious gas
|
| 2) how much quieter inner city walking will become. It can't come
| fast enough!
| fire_lake wrote:
| Big improvements, but keep in mind that air and tyre resistance
| are the loudest aspects of driving at even moderate speeds.
| alan-hn wrote:
| And that pollution of tire degradation is one of the biggest
| sources of particles from cars
| guntars wrote:
| Don't forget the brakes. When the rotors get worn down,
| where did they go?
| pwatsonwailes wrote:
| This. People always underestimate how much noise rolling
| resistance of tyres plays in the sound profile of traffic.
| Electric cars are worse under 50mph, basically because
| they're heavier.
| bojan wrote:
| Electric cars start and accelerate noiselessly - both very
| common activities in the inner city driving.
| Spivak wrote:
| The parent's point is that the engine isn't the largest
| contributor of noise. At low speeds the engine noise
| dominates, at "high" (meaning normal driving speeds)
| speeds the tire noise dominates.
|
| Go listen to a highway and see if you can hear the
| engines over the wooshing.
| Retric wrote:
| Cars in cities rarely travel quickly, spending lot's of
| time stopped at traffic lights right where people cross
| the street or stuck in traffic.
|
| The squeal of a worn out brake pads is largely mitigated
| by regenerative breaks which increase brake lifespan.
| piva00 wrote:
| Another reason to limit inner city traffic to 30 km/h to
| 40 km/h :)
| Retric wrote:
| An ICE engine is vastly louder at 5MPH such as when
| stationary at a stoplight or stuck in heavy traffic. Both
| of which are is really common in cities.
|
| Regenerative braking is also vastly quieter.
| hristov wrote:
| No they are not. Electric cars are notably quieter under 50
| mph. They are notably quieter at all speeds really.
| jlund-molfese wrote:
| Maybe inside of a regular electric car, but the worst noise
| pollution in cities comes from cars and motorcycles with
| modified exhaust and incessant honking. Cars are loud and
| that's a problem by itself, but a car with a bad driver is
| exponentially worse than one with a normal driver.
| noahtallen wrote:
| That's one part, but the other massive part is noise from
| freeways and the baseline white noise from faster roads,
| where most of the noise comes from tires. EVs are not
| better (and typically worse since they're heavier) -- the
| only way to fix it is 1. No freeways in city centers. 2.
| Fewer cars. 3. Noise barriers. 4. Asphalt that reduces tire
| noise (uncommon in North American cities, where concrete is
| used to improve the lifespan).
|
| I can't use my balcony in a downtown city center because
| the baseline tire noise from the highway is so loud, and
| that's without the obnoxious exhaust
| ravetcofx wrote:
| Yup,Electric cars aren't quieter at all compared to movement
| I.C.E cars. Speeds need to be lowered to 35km/hr or lower.
| Theodores wrote:
| I have been a proponent of electric cars but the way it has
| panned out has made me less enthusiastic. Really it is just
| about showing you have a six figure salary and nothing to do
| with being kind to the planet.
|
| My new phrase is 'active travel' and this means walking,
| cycling or using a wheelchair. The opposite of 'active travel'
| is car dependency.
|
| For the car dependent person, walking is something you do after
| driving to the car park in the beauty spot, to get the boots
| out the back of the car and do 'hiking' as a leisure exercise,
| to not actually do anything of purpose. Cycling is the same, a
| bicycle is just a toy for leisure, with a piece of polystyrene
| having to be worn on the head.
|
| In the world of 'active travel' the walk is to the shops or to
| see a friend. It is the same with cycling, rather than
| pointlessly ride on a 'toy', it is a trip to work or the shops,
| a journey of purpose.
|
| With 'active travel' there is community. You meet people old
| and new on the journeys you take and you can stop and talk. Car
| dependent people can honk their horns and wave, but that is
| quite primitive communication compared to saying hello. Just
| today I met someone on the canal towpath that is cycling coast
| to coast, having met him a couple of days ago too. It was great
| to see him again, and that was just one interaction on my
| journey. I had to get somewhere so I did not stop to talk for
| too long, but you just don't have those sorts of interactions
| if trapped in a tin box, electric or otherwise. Yes there might
| be cup holders, air conditioning and massaging heated seats,
| but I prefer the community aspect of 'active travel'.
|
| When people go car dependent they take themselves out of being
| part of the community.
|
| A huge part of this is noise levels. Sometimes I use turn by
| turn directions on my phone, and, if I am on towpaths, the
| volume of 'after 200 yards, turn right' is embarrassingly loud.
| Yet, if I have the same volume and I am on a normal road, I
| make wrong turns because the noise of cars, even at a low speed
| on quiet roads, is too loud for me to hear the turn by turn
| directions.
|
| Only if spending hours on canal towpaths and former railway
| tracks turned into cycle paths so you realise how absurd the
| noise of car dependency is.
|
| Another phrase is 'livable neighbourhoods' and the idea is to
| put active travel first so there is a return to community and
| health. Sadly, electric cars are a folly. I don't hate on them,
| I have just discovered 'active travel'.
|
| Incidentally, 'active travel' depends on health, and that means
| either being young or eating for nutrition. You can't walk your
| way out of a bad diet, or cycle out of it. There is a whole lot
| we need to work out and electric cars, sadly, are not it, not
| even for people that live in the countryside, have a dozen kids
| and a job a hundred miles away.
| ipqk wrote:
| Sorry, but most car pollution is from the tires/tyres, not the
| exhaust. Electric cars don't solve that, and may even make it
| worse because they're heavier.
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/03/car-tyre...
| phatfish wrote:
| The parent was worried about "noxious gas", not rubber
| particles. Cars with an ICE have tires as well,
| unfortunately.
| hristov wrote:
| Your link does not say what you purport it to say. It limits
| things to particle pollution. It makes sense that tires will
| create more particle pollution, but gasoline creates a lot of
| gas pollution as well.
| ipqk wrote:
| The tire & brake particulates go into the air. Sure,
| technically not gas, but we breathe it in just the same.
| silisili wrote:
| Most road noise and even pollution comes from tires, not a gas
| burning engine. I lived about a half mile from an xway once.
| You'd hear an occasional jake brake or loud motorcycle, but by
| far the most annoying thing was the constant whooshing noises
| of normal cars passing by.
| kiba wrote:
| The best car is actually no car. No EV, not just ICE means no
| noise or tire pollution.
| maskros wrote:
| Then you haven't heard electric cars running at low speed or
| put in reverse. Try to chill near any space where EVs frequent
| (like near a parking lot or train station with lots of traffic)
| and it's a constant source of artificial speaker noise:
|
| WHIRR! WHINE! HUM! LOOK AT ME I'M ELECTRIC WITH A BIG SPEAKER!
| WHINE! WHIRR!
|
| BING, BING, BING, BING, BING! LOOK OUT HERE I COME IN REVERSE!
| BING! (The Ioniq 5 is a particularly bad offender here ... the
| reversing bing can be heard multiple blocks away).
|
| I wish EV auto-makers would turn the default warning noise
| levels their cars emit WAY THE FUCK DOWN because it's seriously
| annoying! I get not wanting to startle pedestrians, but you
| don't have to alert the entire neighborhood...
| nicoburns wrote:
| > I wish EV auto-makers would turn the default warning noise
| levels their cars emit WAY THE FUCK DOWN because it's
| seriously annoying! I get not wanting to startle pedestrians,
| but you don't have to alert the entire neighborhood...
|
| I'm pretty sure this is a legal requirement not something the
| EV manufacturers are choosing to do. Although I guess this
| may vary by juristiction.
| oopsallmagic wrote:
| Adult brains, too. I appreciate the study, but this is one of
| those "yes, obviously" situations for anyone who has ever been
| outside amongst cars.
| ZoomerCretin wrote:
| It's one of those "yes, obviously" situations that are
| surprisingly controversial if you mention it in conversation.
| There are a lot of people (likely the already heavily hearing-
| damaged) that have zero problem with road noise and are very
| dismissive of any and all noise concerns.
| james4k wrote:
| We already know pollution from cars increases childhood asthma,
| and I imagine those pollutants could affect brain development as
| well.
|
| Edit: Also I would be curious to know how dog barks affect
| children's brains. Of all the environmental noise, dogs are often
| the loudest and most jarring, anecdotally.
| erikaww wrote:
| Dogs barking cannot be worse than cars, especially compensators
| with the pop pop pop engines or tires screeching. Live right by
| a doggy daycare and several busy arterials
| james4k wrote:
| On average I agree. Dog noise doesn't carry nearly as far.
| But if you're neighbors with noisy dogs, it's probably at the
| top of your mind.
| blackeyeblitzar wrote:
| This feels like a study with many confounding factors.
| brikym wrote:
| It may not be noise causing all these things. It could be tyre
| dust or fumes or lack of exercise from driving everywhere or
| anxiety from being hit by a car. It still points a big finger
| at car culture being bad.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-06-23 23:01 UTC)