Underwater noise modelling for environmental impact assessment

Farcas, Adrian; Thompson, Paul M.; Merchant, Nathan D.

doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2015.11.012

Cited by 96 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This has recently been considered in detail within the specific domain of Environmental Impact Assessments (Farcas et al 2016), with similar conclusions. Received Levels, if appropriately documented (Merchant et al 2015;Robinson et al 2014), should however be most useful when comparing different MRE devices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

“…Model appropriateness is further discussed across multiple publications, e.g. Farcas et al 2016;Wang et al 2014;Etter 2013. Another significant result from Figure 4 highlights that there are significant areas where a large Transmission Loss is accumulated over a significant range. For example, in Figure 4, between 100 m and 125 m, there is a sustained transmission loss of 45 -50 dB.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modelling the propagation of underwater acoustic emissions for condition monitoring of marine renewable energy

Walsh

Bashir

Thies

et al. 2016

Progress in Renewable Energies Offshore

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling the propagation of underwater acoustic emissions for condition monitoring of marine renewable energy

Walsh

Bashir

Thies

et al. 2016

Progress in Renewable Energies Offshore

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Perhaps unsurprisingly, we found them to be largely in agreement with one another once we considered the content of the articles, the workshop discussion, and rationale behind scoring of questions. Hooker and Gerber, 2004;Firestone and Jarvis, 2007;Haren, 2007;Weilgart, 2007;Tyack, 2008;Codarin et al, 2009;Hatch and Fristrup, 2009;Wright et al, 2011;Simmonds et al, 2014;Williams et al, 2014a;Bas et al, 2015;Williams et al, 2015a;Erbe et al, 2016b;Hatch et al, 2016;Pine et al, 2016 2 13 10 4 Lesage et al, 1999;Buckstaff, 2004;Wright et al, 2007;Hatch and Fristrup, 2009;Jensen et al, 2009;Ellison et al, 2011;Merchant et al, 2012b;Williams et al, 2014a;Maccarrone et al, 2015;Brooker and Humphrey, 2016;Erbe et al, 2016b;Farcas et al, 2016;Prins et al, 20163 13 11 3 Nowacek et al, 2001Johnson and Tyack, 2003;Firestone and Jarvis, 2007;Horowitz and Jasny, 2007;Weilgart, 2007;Hatch and Fristrup, 2009;Holt et al, 2009;Wieland et al, 2010;Williams et al, 2014a;…”

Section: Priority Questions In Published Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the articles we assessed in general also agreed with another of the Williams et al (2014b) findings in that the majority of the papers concentrated on ecological impacts, management, and policy rather than physical interests. For example, Maccarrone et al (2015) and Farcas et al (2016), both considered best practices for assessing marine noise, while studies such as those carried out by Pine et al (2016) and Houghton et al (2015) consider the direct ecological impacts of anthropogenic noise producing activities on specific species and in particular areas. Although some journals such as Marine Mammal Science or JASA may have been more strongly represented than others in our literature search, this could perhaps largely be attributed to the key words used during our search.…”

Section: Priority Questions In Published Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is now also widely recognized that marine anthropogenic noise can have negative impacts on a broad variety of marine species Merchant et al, 2014;Williams et al, 2015a,b;Farcas et al, 2016;Garrett et al, 2016;Pine et al, 2016;Todd, 2016). Until relatively recently, loud impulsive sounds such as pile driving and active sonar were the only form of noise pollution considered to pose a major threat to marine species, specifically mammals (Southall et al, 2007).…”

Section: Introduction the Emerging Issue Of Chronic Noise Pollution Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Grand Challenges in Researching Marine Noise Pollution from Vessels: A Horizon Scan for 2017

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chronic anthropogenic underwater noise, such as vessel noise, is now recognized as a world-wide problem. Marine noise from vessels, ranging from super tankers to small motorboats is increasingly recognized as being both a persistent and pervasive pollutant. Furthermore, due to its spatial and temporal variability, vessel noise pollution represents a particular challenge for marine conservation, management, and planning. This paper presents the outputs of a horizon scanning exercise that brought together a group of 40 individuals from across Canada, including: researchers, policy makers, NGOs and other end-users who work in the field of marine acoustics. The goal was to identify priority information needs, related to marine vessel acoustics, to inform new research and address policy needs. Via an iterative Delphi style process, participants identified 10 priority research questions related to marine vessel acoustic science; for example, How important is it to identify and maintain acoustic refugia? What attributes of marine vessels are the most effective indicators of marine noise? The questions were then further considered in terms of extent of current knowledge, time scale by which they can be achieved, the financial resources required and the importance of answering the question. Subsequently, the authors conducted a search of the peer-reviewed literature to situate the challenges highlighted by the horizon scanning exercise within the broader global research. Results show that investigating the attributes of marine vessels that are the most effective indicators of marine noise is a viable research question to tackle first. In addition, underpinning many of these questions is the need of long-term data collection and monitoring of both vessel traffic and marine mammal populations.

show abstract

Balancing risks of injury and disturbance to marine mammals when pile driving at offshore windfarms

Thompson

Graham

Cheney

et al. 2020

Ecol Sol and Evidence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Offshore windfarms require construction procedures that minimize impacts on protected marine mammals. Uncertainty over the efficacy of existing guidelines for mitigating near-field injury when pile-driving recently resulted in the development of alternative measures, which integrated the routine deployment of acoustic deterrent devices (ADD) into engineering installation procedures without prior monitoring by marine mammal observers. 2. We conducted research around the installation of jacket foundations at the UK's first deep-water offshore windfarm to address data gaps identified by regulators when consenting this new approach. Specifically, we aimed to (a) measure the relationship between noise levels and hammer energy to inform assessments of near-field injury zones and (b) assess the efficacy of ADDs to disperse harbour porpoises from these zones. 3. Distance from piling vessel had the biggest influence on received noise levels but, unexpectedly, received levels at any given distance were highest at low hammer energies. Modelling highlighted that this was because noise from pin pile installations was dominated by the strong negative relationship with pile penetration depth with only a weak positive relationship with hammer energy. 4. Acoustic detections of porpoises along a gradient of ADD exposure decreased in the 3-h following a 15-min ADD playback, with a 50% probability of response within 21.7 km. The minimum time to the first porpoise detection after playbacks was > 2 h for sites within 1 km of the playback. 5. Our data suggest that the current regulatory focus on maximum hammer energies needs review, and future assessments of noise exposure should also consider foundation type. Despite higher piling noise levels than predicted, responses to ADD playback suggest mitigation was sufficiently conservative. Conversely, strong responses of porpoises to ADDs resulted in far-field disturbance beyond that required to mitigate injury. We recommend that risks to marine mammals can be further minimized by (1) optimizing ADD source signals and/or deployment schedules to minimize broad-scale This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Underwater noise modelling for environmental impact assessment

Cited by 96 publications

References 32 publications

Modelling the propagation of underwater acoustic emissions for condition monitoring of marine renewable energy

Modelling the propagation of underwater acoustic emissions for condition monitoring of marine renewable energy

The Grand Challenges in Researching Marine Noise Pollution from Vessels: A Horizon Scan for 2017

Balancing risks of injury and disturbance to marine mammals when pile driving at offshore windfarms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About