Noise monitoring in the city of São Luís, Brazil
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X34434Keywords:
Noise. Traffic. Vegetation.Abstract
The noise generated by vehicular traffic is a major source of discomfort for urban residents and directly affects their quality of life. This study performed the monitoring of urban noise in the city of São Luís, Brazil. The data were collected at 25 sampling points throughout the city over a period of 6 months—1 week per month from Monday to Sunday between the hours of 11:00 and 13:00. The results showed that 23 points were above the limits established by NBR 10151/00. The analysis of variance showed significant differences between the points. Therefore, it is evident that the population is exposed to high levels of noise capable of generating public health problems. The two points within the NBR limits were recorded in an area with dense vegetation, showing the importance of the preservation of the vegetation.
Downloads
References
ABNT. (2000). NBR 10.151. Contributions to Psychological Acoustics–Results of the eight Oldenburg Symposium on Psychological Acoustics. Retrieved from http://www.semace.ce.gov.br/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Avaliação+do+Ruído+em+Áreas+Habitadas.pdf
Alves, J., Silva, L., & Remoaldo, P. (2015). The Influence of Low-Frequency Noise Pollution on the Quality of Life and Place in Sustainable Cities: A Case Study from Northern Portugal. Sustainability, 7(10), 13920–13946. https://doi.org/10.3390/su71013920
Bachmann, R. K. B., Carneiro, L. M., & Espejo, M. M. D. S. B. (2013). Evidenciação de informações ambientais: proposta de um indicador a partir da percepção de especialistas. Revista de Contabilidade e Organizações, 7, 36–47. https://doi.org/10.11606/rco.v7i17.56666
Brito, L. A. P. F. de. (2017). A utilização de mapas acústicos como ferramenta de identificação do excesso de ruído em áreas urbanas. Engenharia Sanitaria e Ambiental, (0). https://doi.org/10.1590/s1413-41522017152589
da Paz, E. C., Ferreira, A. M. C., & Zannin, P. H. T. (2005). Comparative study of the perception of urban noise | Estudo comparativo da percepção do ruído urbano. Revista de Saude Publica, 39(3).
EC. (2002). Directive 2002/49/EC of the European parliament and the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise. Official Journal of the European Communities, 189(12), 12–25.
Guedes, I. C. M., & Bertoli, S. R. (2014). Mapa acústico como ferramenta de avaliação de ruído de tráfego veicular em Aracaju – Brasil. PARC Pesquisa Em Arquitetura e Construção, 5(2), 40–51. Retrieved from https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/parc/article/viewFile/8634537/2458
Hanson, D. I., Donavon, P., James, R., Monismith, C., Anderson, D., Davis, R., & Swanlund, M. (2005). Tire/pavement noise characteristics of HMA pavements. Asphalt Paving Technology: Association of Asphalt Paving Technologists-Proceedings of the Technical Sessions, 74, 1005–1041.
IBGE. (2017). IBGE - Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Retrieved from https://mapas.ibge.gov.br/tematicos
J. C. de A. Bessa, A. M. M. de Lima, J. de A. S. J. (2017). Avaliação da poluição sonora e zoneamento de ruído em área piloto no município de Manaus/AM. ENGEVISTA, 19(2), 409–426. https://doi.org/10.22409/engevista.v19i2.852
Lacerda, A., Figueiredo, G., Massarolo Neto, J., & Marques, J. M. (2010). Achados audiológicos e queixas relacionadas à audição dos motoristas de ônibus urbano. Revista Da Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia, 15(2), 161–166. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-80342010000200003
Lacerda, A. B. M. de, Magni, C., Morata, T. C., Marques, J. M., & Zannin, P. H. T. (2005). Ambiente Urbano e Percepção da Poluição Sonora. Ambiente & Sociedade, VIII(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1414-753X2005000200005
Mendonça, A. B. D., Suriano, M. T., Lucas De Souza, C., & Viviani, E. (2013). Classes de quadras urbanas determinadas pelos níveis de ruídos. Revista Brasileira de Gestão Urbana (Brazilian Journal of Urban Management, (2), 63–77. https://doi.org/10.7213/urbe.05.002.SE05
Penido, Eustáquio Couto Azevedo, F. R., & Souza, J. H. de. (2014). Poluição sonora: aspectos ambientais e saúde pública. Revista Das Faculdades Integradas Vianna Júnior, 2(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2
Ravinder, L., & Belachew, M. G. (2014). Urban Noise in a Metropolitan Towns. Urban Noise in a Metropolitan Town, (October), 1–13.
Szeremeta, B., & Zannin, P. H. T. (2013). A importância dos parques urbanos e áreas verdes na promoção da qualidade de vida em cidades. Raega - O Espaço Geográfico Em Análise, 29, 177. https://doi.org/10.5380/raega.v29i0.30747
W. L. de Almeida, V. B. Campos, R. de M. R. Neto, P. F. H. Sampaio, E. D. Ribeiro, J. F. R. C. (2016). Avaliação do nível de ruído nas proximidades do Hospital Estadual de Laranjal do Jari (Amapá). Saúde & Meio Ambiente, 5(1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.24302/sma.v5i1.796
World Health Organization -WHO. (2011). Burden of disease from environmental noise. World Health, 1–105.
Zannin, P. H. T., Calixto, A., Diniz, F. B., Ferreira, J. A., & Schuhli, R. B. (2002). Incômodo causado pelo ruído urbano a população de Curitiba, PR. Revista de Saude Publica, 36(4), 521–524. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-89102002000400020
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
