of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth. behind this air attack will follow sea and land forces in such numbers and power as they have not yet seen and with the fighting skill of which they are already well aware. the secretary of war, who has kept in personal touch with all phases of the project, will immediately make public a statement giving further details. his statement will give facts concerning the sites at oak ridge near knoxville, tennessee, and at richland near pasco, washington, and an installation near santa fe, new mexico. although the workers at the sites have been making materials to be used in producing the greatest destructive force in history they have not themselves been in danger beyond that of many other occupations, for the utmost care has been taken of their safety. the fact that we can release atomic energy ushers in a new era in man ’ s understanding of nature ’ s forces. atomic energy may in the future supplement the power that now comes from coal, oil, and falling water, but at present it cannot be produced on a basis to compete with them commercially. before that comes there must be a long period of intensive research. it has never been the habit of the scientists of this country or the policy of this government to withhold from the world scientific knowledge. normally, therefore, everything about the work with atomic energy would be made public. but under present circumstances it is not intended to divulge the technical processes of production or all the military applications, pending further examination of possible methods of protecting us and the rest of the world from the danger of sudden destruction. i shall recommend that the congress of the united states consider promptly the establishment of an appropriate commission to control the production and use of atomic power within the united states. i shall give further consideration and make further recommendations to the congress as to how atomic power can become a powerful and forceful influence towards the maintenance of world peace. [ cross - posted at redstate ]


question by alexis : chemistry reaction problem?? about mass? please help! thanks!? an experiment that led to the formation of the new field of organic chemistry involved the synthesis of urea, cn2h4o, by the controlled reaction of ammonia and carbon dioxide. 2 nh3 ( g ) + co2 ( g ) cn2h4o ( s ) + h2o ( l ) what is the mass of urea when ammonia is reacted with 100. g of carbon dioxide? answer by jreut use dimensional analysis and stoichiometry : 100 g co2 x 1 mole co2 / 44 g co2 x 1 mol urea / 1 mole co2 x 60 g urea / 1 mole urea = 100 / 44 * 60 = 136. grams of urea produced. the first term, 100 g co2, is your starting amount. the second fraction, 1 mol co2 / 44 g co2, is a conversion factor that equals 1, since there are 44 g co2 in a mole of co2. the third fraction is the stoichiometric ratio in the chemical equation : for every one mole of co2 consumed, 1 mol of urea is formed. the fourth fraction is the conversion factor back to grams. add your own answer in the comments! - installing virtue oled board & laser eyes in dye dm9 paintball gun - bridging digital and physical worlds with sixthsense - official angry birds 3 star walkthrough theme 3 levels 1 - 5 - htc schubert - sketching out a future for the stylus


generation. to add to this, now it is also imperative that our fragile environment suffers the least damage possible. in more technical terms, sustainable development is the need of the hour. sustainable development is the only way we can keep mother nature, our growth hungry economies and our very demanding present generation and future lineage happy and smiling. sustainable development is defined by the brundtland commission as “ development that meets the need of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs ”. the field of sustainable development is broadly categorized into the following dimensions : social, economic, environmental and institutional. the future of our planet depends on our use of the available resources. this does not mean that we stall all progress to save the resources for our future generation. this calls for efficient use of non - renewable resources. wastage of such resources must be minimized and alternative sources should be made more feasible for even the common man. by shifting the energy burden from non - renewable to renewable resources, we can stand up to the challenges of the future. a lot can be done using biomass, biofuels, hydroelectric energy, tidal energy, nuclear energy, fusion power, wind power, solar power, and geothermal energy. these are welcome options to ease the burden on our over pressed fossil fuels. these very inviting options are, infact, keeping our scientists busy as they try to find out different ways in which we can use these inexhaustible powerhouses of energy to our advantage. hydroelectric energy serves as an alternative way of generating electricity. the gravitational descant of a river is compressed to a dam or flume. at high pressure, this is used to turn gigantic turbines which in turn produce electricity. this way we can spare some of the coal which would have otherwise been used for this very process. who would have thought that that stinky, disgusting garbage would be such an amazing friend to us in the time of need? biomass involves using garbage, vegetable matter to produce electricity. on decomposing, garbage releases methane ( the root cause of all the stench ) which is captured in pipes and can later on be used to produce electricity. garbage can aptly be called a blessing in disguise! nuclear energy is the king of all alternate sources of energy. by using nuclear fission, electricity can be generated. in fact, by using 1kg of uranium or thorium energy, equivalent to 3. 5 million kg of coal can be produced. this is an area in which extensive research and development is being carried out. since


, electricity can be generated. in fact, by using 1kg of uranium or thorium energy, equivalent to 3. 5 million kg of coal can be produced. this is an area in which extensive research and development is being carried out. since nuclear energy does not release any polluting gases like carbon dioxide or sulphur dioxide, hence no acid rain or global warming. the limiting factor, which is keeping nuclear energy from being the mother of all energy sources, is that setting up a nuclear plant which meets the safety norms requires huge capital investments. disposing off the toxic nuclear waste is also a problem. it will still be some time before the world can confidently rely on nuclear energy. wind energy is also being harnessed to produce electricity. but this form also has its shortfalls. the wind is rather unpredictable. also, a large land area is required to set up the windmills. the location and type of turbines used in this process can adversely affect bird migration patterns. the sun god has also not stayed behind. its power is also being used to generate electricity and on a smaller scale, to cook food, heat water etc. the development of photovoltaic and solar cells is quite an expensive operation. yet, solar energy is being seen as a very attractive source of energy. there are many other sources which are contributing in their own way to save us from the day of doom. in addition, many new experiments are being carried out to minimize the use of fossil fuels and save the environment from degradation. battery powered vehicles are being created. in fact in agra, only battery powered locomotives are allowed in the vicinity of the tag mahal. these vehicles use a battery which is charged from a grid when the vehicle is not in use. many more such innovations are under way every hour of the day. man, the sublime being, will not give up so easily. he plans to face the threat of depleting resources which looms large by innovating, experimenting and manipulating alternative energy sources so that we don ’ t have to halt either our progress or compromise on that of our progeny.


mit professor ’ s book digs into the eclectic, textually linked reading choices of people in medieval london. the glitter of gold may hold more than just beauty, or so says a team of mit researchers that is working on ways to use tiny gold rods to fight cancer, deliver drugs and more. but before gold nanorods can live up to their potential, scientists must figure out how to overcome one major difficulty : the surfaces of the tiny particles are coated with an uncooperative molecule ( a byproduct of the synthesis process ) that prevents researchers from creating nanorods with the features they want. " the surface chemistry is really key to everything, " said kimberly hamad - schifferli, assistant professor of biological and mechanical engineering at mit. " for all of these nifty applications to work, someone ' s got to sit down and do the dirty work of understanding the surface. " hamad - schifferli and her colleagues published two papers this month describing ways to manipulate the nanorods ' surface, which could allow researchers to design nanorods with specific useful functions. as their name implies, gold nanorods are tiny cylinders of gold, about 10 billionths of a meter wide and 40 billionths of a meter long. they differ from traditional, spherical gold nanoparticles in one very important respect - - they can absorb infrared light. that means they can theoretically be activated by infrared laser without damaging surrounding cells, which do not absorb infrared light. before that can happen, scientists must figure out how to deal with an organic molecule known as ctab that coats the outer surface of gold nanorods and tends to detach from and reattach itself to the surface. the molecule, a byproduct of the synthesis reaction that produces the nanorods, makes it difficult to attach other molecules for delivery, such as drugs or dna. the team ' s two recent papers describe how the ctab influences heat dissipation and how to remove the ctab and replace it with another organic molecule. in the first paper, published online aug. 12 in the journal of physical chemistry c, they found that a low concentration of the ctab in the surrounding solution accelerates heat dissipation after the nanorod is hit with infrared light. when the concentration of ctab is high, heat is dissipated more slowly. that information could help scientists design nanorods that fight cancer agents by burning away tumor cells when activated with infrared light. in the second paper, published online aug


infrared light. when the concentration of ctab is high, heat is dissipated more slowly. that information could help scientists design nanorods that fight cancer agents by burning away tumor cells when activated with infrared light. in the second paper, published online aug. 22 in the journal langmuir, the team demonstrated how to replace ctab with a more useful molecule - - a sulfur - containing group known as a thiol. this molecule binds more strongly to the nanorod, so it doesn ' t detach and reattach like ctab. in addition, other molecules, such as dna, can be easily attached to the end of the thiol. these surface chemistry studies are critical to lay the groundwork for development of gold nanorods, according to hamad - schifferli. " people have dreamed up all of these cool applications for nanorods, but one of the biggest bottlenecks to making this a reality is this interface, " she said. in the future, hamad - schifferli and her colleagues hope to build gold nanorods that carry dna designed for a specific function in the target cell. for example, the dna could shut down production of a protein that is being overexpressed. lead author of the langmuir paper is andy wijaya, a graduate student in chemical engineering. lead authors of the jpcc paper are aaron schmidt, a postdoctoral associate in mechanical engineering, and joshua alper, a graduate student in mechanical engineering. other authors are matteo chiesa, a visiting scholar in the technology and development program, gang chen, the rohsenow professor of mechanical engineering, and sarit das, a visiting professor in mechanical engineering. the work was funded by the norwegian research council, the ford - mit alliance and the national science foundation.


i hold onto heredity. genes must be present in order to be passed along. this is true. randomness ignores heredity, claiming that changes come by chance. hmm, no, not really. the changes do come by chance, but the random mutation aspect of it does not ignore heredity at all. in fact, its an integral part of the process. you see, we know random mutations happen. they are errors in the copying process. how do we know they happen? because of genetic disorders and how they present. there are lots of them to chose from. but let me show a little bit about how it works. lets say we have a strand of dna that looks like this.... there are a few ways we can get things to happen here. first, we can have a single letter change... for example the third letter somehow ( randomly, by chance. as an error in the copying process ) is changed to a t. now, when that dna strand codes for a protein, ( or is part of the on / off sequencing of the coding ), that random mutation gives a certain characteristic that is different than it would have been previously. ( for the sake of understanding, lets say it is... fur pigmentation in a rabbit or something ). if that particular difference makes a change that is beneficial to the individual ( for our rabbit, if they live in the arctic, lets assume that maybe the fur is a bit more white than that of his neighbors ), then that particular individual will be more likely to pass on its dna ( new and improved ) to the next generation simply by being better adapted to survive in that particular environment. you ' ve already agreed to heredity, so that ' s not up for discussion. another way it can happen is to have an additional letter added in. maybe add a t in between the first 2 g ' s up there. in that respect, everything on down the line is going to be effected ( pushed down one ), and depending on where this addition is, this can have massive effects on the dna sequence. if the addition is late in the dna strand, the effects might be less noticeable than if it were early in the sequence pushing everything on down the line. there are a few other ways that i can ' t remember off hand right now, but you get the point here. these random changes ( errors in the copying process for whatever reason ) can be either good, bad or completely benign to the organism. do you see that now?


that i can ' t remember off hand right now, but you get the point here. these random changes ( errors in the copying process for whatever reason ) can be either good, bad or completely benign to the organism. do you see that now? which ignores natural selection, which claims that whis is is better than that which was. really? so with our rabbit in the previous example... if his random mutation gives him fur that is a bit more white than other individuals of his species... and he ' s living in the arctic ; does that offer him it a better chance at survival? of course it does. that one tiny copying error just happened to give the rabbit less fur pigmentation, and therefore an increased chance of survival over its neighbors. what is the deciding factor between passing the genes on or not? it ' s whether the rabbit gets killed ( maybe by a wolf with good eyesight ) before it mates. in the arctic, does a white rabbit or an off white rabbit have a better chance to pass on it ' s genes? the white rabbit does, obviously. now that one tiny error might have given the rabbit increased muscle length, or better vision, or better hearing.. or it might have made it slower, or darker in color, or decreased it ' s sense of smell. natural selection determines whether or not it was beneficial simply by whether or not the new trait helps the individual live or die. that ' s it. it ' s as simple as that, really. which ignores heredity which claims that the genes of a progeny must be passed by the parent. which ignores randomness through the claim that what is has been passed by one who has it already no, and no. evolution has taken these thrown them in the soup of the past, and said it is how we were made. because it offers the very best explanation as to how all life came to be. not because we like it, or because it ' s super cool and all we want to do is mash any silly creationist nonsense. it ' s because it explains in great detail how all the facts fit together. really, its not a conspiracy against you. even if evolution wasn ' t true, creationism or id would still be utter bullshit. it just so happens that evolution is true. it would be true regardless of what invisible sky man you or anyone else thinks exists. not scientific. not rational, not logical. you ' re absolutely wrong here. it ' s all 3. very much all 3.


viticulture - n. : the cultivation or culture of grapes enology - n. : a science that deals with wine and wine making the v & e department combines the sciences of viticulture and enology in a single research and teaching unit that encompasses all of the scientific disciplines that impact grape growing and winemaking. for over one hundred years the university of california has maintained an active and productive program in research and education in viticulture and enology. the continuing excellence of the department has enabled california growers and vintners to develop practices that have allowed the golden state to achieve its potential and become a premier wine - producing region. the hilgard project and the future the hilgard project : web - based, automated wine fermentations at uc davis winery. scott professor of enology and chemical engineering the university of california is in the design and construction phases of a building complex that will be known as the robert mondavi institute for wine and food ( rmi ). the generous gift of $ 20m by robert and margrit mondavi and the matching funds from the state of california, will establish a unique centre that is home to the departments of viticulture and enology and of food science ( see : http : / / robertmondaviinstitute. ucdavis. edu / ). some of the greatest limitations to small - scale research winemaking are irreprod...


key : " s : " = show synset ( semantic ) relations, " w : " = show word ( lexical ) relations display options for sense : ( gloss ) " an example sentence " - s : ( n ) abscission, cutting off ( the act of cutting something off ) - s : ( n ) cut, cutting, cutting off ( the act of shortening something by chopping off the ends ) " the barber gave him a good cut " - s : ( v ) interrupt, disrupt, break up, cut off ( make a break in ) " we interrupt the program for the following messages " - s : ( v ) cut, cut off ( cease, stop ) " cut the noise " ; " we had to cut short the conversation " - s : ( v ) cut off, chop off, lop off ( remove by or as if by cutting ) " cut off the ear " ; " lop off the dead branch " - s : ( v ) cut off, cut out ( cut off and stop ) " the bicyclist was cut out by the van " - s : ( v ) chip, knap, cut off, break off ( break a small piece off from ) " chip the glass " ; " chip a tooth " - s : ( v ) amputate, cut off ( remove surgically ) " amputate limbs "


key : " s : " = show synset ( semantic ) relations, " w : " = show word ( lexical ) relations display options for sense : ( gloss ) " an example sentence " - s : ( n ) guard ( a person who keeps watch over something or someone ) - s : ( n ) guard ( the person who plays that position on a football team ) " the left guard was injured on the play " - s : ( n ) guard, safety, safety device ( a device designed to prevent injury or accidents ) - s : ( n ) guard ( a posture of defence in boxing or fencing ) " keep your guard up " - s : ( n ) guard ( the person who plays the position of guard on a basketball team ) - s : ( n ) guard ( a military unit serving to protect some place or person ) - s : ( n ) precaution, safeguard, guard ( a precautionary measure warding off impending danger or damage or injury etc. ) " he put an ice pack on the injury as a precaution " ; " an insurance policy is a good safeguard " ; " we let our guard down " - s : ( n ) guard duty, guard, sentry duty, sentry go ( the duty of serving as a sentry ) " he was on guard that night " - s : ( n ) guard ( ( american football ) a position on the line of scrimmage ) " guards must be good blockers " - s : ( n ) guard ( a position on a basketball team ) - s : ( v ) guard ( to keep watch over ) " there would be men guarding the horses " - s : ( v ) guard, ward ( watch over or shield from danger or harm ; protect ) " guard my possessions while i ' m away " - s : ( v ) defend, guard, hold ( protect against a challenge or attack ) " hold that position behind the trees! " ; " hold the bridge against the enemy ' s attacks " - s : ( v ) guard ( take precautions in order to avoid some unwanted consequence ) " guard against becoming too friendly with the staff " ; " guard against infection "


| the surprising appearance of nanotubular fullerene d5h ( 1 ) - c90 | the previously undetected fullerene d5h ( 1 ) - c90 — with a distinct nanotubular shape — has been isolated as the major c90 isomer produced from sm2o3 - doped graphite rods and structurally identified by single - crystal x - ray diffraction. fullerenes are well - defined molecules that consist of closed cages of carbon atoms and distinct inside and outside surfaces. they tend to form very small crystals ; consequently, high - resolution data was collected using small - molecule crystallography at als beamline 11. 3. 1. the discovery of nanotubular d5h ( 1 ) - c90, which is a fullerene with 90 carbon atoms and d5h symmetry, opens a bridge between molecular fullerenes and carbon nanotubes. in recent years, the well - known solid allotropes diamond and graphite have been joined by new allotropes : fullerenes, carbon nanotubes, and graphene. diamond consists of four - coordinate carbon atoms with tetrahedral geometry, while the other allotropes involve three - coordinate carbon atoms. in graphite, these carbon atoms are arranged in hexagonal sheets that are stacked upon one another. graphene is simply a single hexagonal graphitic sheet with a thickness of only one atom. carbon nanotubes can be conceived as hexagonal graphene sheets rolled into cylindrical shapes. these tubes may consist of a single wall of carbon atoms ( single - walled carbon nanotubes ) or may consist of multiple layers of tubes nested inside one another ( multi - wall carbon nanotubes ). carbon nanotubes are produced as mixtures in which the individual tubes can vary in length, width, precise alignment of the component hexagons, and the chemical nature of the unique carbon atoms at the two ends of the tube. graphene is likewise produced as sheets of varying size with generally less well - defined structures for those carbon atoms at the outer edges. fullerenes of varying sizes ( from 60 to more than 500 carbon atoms ) have also been observed, and individual molecules such as c60 and c70 have been isolated in pure form. each fullerene is constructed of 12 pentagonal rings of carbon atoms and a number of hexagonal rings. for example, the prototypical c60, the most readily prepared fullerene, has 20 hexagonal rings in addition to the 12 pentagons


fullerene is constructed of 12 pentagonal rings of carbon atoms and a number of hexagonal rings. for example, the prototypical c60, the most readily prepared fullerene, has 20 hexagonal rings in addition to the 12 pentagons. isolating higher fullerenes in an isomerically pure form is challenging, especially since the number of isomers increases as the size of the fullerene cage expands, as per the isolated pentagon rule ( ipr ). the ipr requires that each pentagon be surrounded by five hexagons to avoid strain - inducing pentagon – pentagon contact. there are 46 isomers of c90 that obey the ipr, but none of these isomers had previously been obtained in pure form. indeed, in the absence of sm2o3, no d5h ( 1 ) - c90 has ever been detected. the oblong fullerene d5h ( 1 ) - c90 belongs to a set of nanotube - like fullerenes with the formula c60 + 10n, which have alternating d5h symmetry ( when n is odd and the end caps are eclipsed ) or d5d symmetry ( when n is even and the end caps are staggered ). the structure of d5h ( 1 ) - c90 ( n = 3 ) is thus closely related to that of c70 ( n = 1 ). however, within this family only c60, c70, and d5h ( 1 ) - c90 have been isolated in pure form and characterized crystallographically. the isolation of d5h ( 1 ) - c90 provides a unique molecular model for carbon nanotubes that will allow scientists to explore the chemical and physical properties of a distinctly cylindrical fullerene. the armchair - style belts that are found at the waist of d5h ( 1 ) - c90 are a unique feature of this particular fullerene, but are the fundamental building block of carbon nanotubes. research conducted by h. yang, a. jiang, z. wang, and z. liu ( zhejiang university, p. r. china ) ; h. jin ( jiliang university, p. r. china ) ; b. q. mercado, m. m. olmstead, and a. l. balch ( university of california, davis ) ; and c. m. beavers ( berkeley lab ). research funding : national science foundation and the natural science foundation of china. operation of the als is supported by the u. s.


yoga has been recognized for some time as being effective in reducing high blood pressure, particularly the diastolic ( lower ) number, which is the most crucial. you can experience the relaxing effects of yoga by committing to a short daily routine of breathing, exercise, and meditation. yoga techniques improve your body ’ s strength and flexibility, teach you how to relax mentally and physically, and show you how to better manage stress reactions such as muscle tension ( most commonly in the face, stomach, neck, shoulders, and breath ), rapid heart rate, constricted breathing, and anxiety. the fastest and most effective way to reduce reaction to stress is to change your breath, and an immediate way to improve your breathing is to improve your posture. in yoga, you learn to strengthen your back and stomach muscles so that you can sit and stand straighter ; this releases pressure on your heart and lungs and allows you to breathe easier. yoga breathing exercises teach you how to breathe more deeply and rhythmically ; this has many effects, both physical and mental. your respiratory muscles become stronger, and more oxygen reaches your bloodstream. regular practice of breathing exercises will give you greater concentration, willpower, and steadiness. you ’ ll feel calmer, too, as you breathe, because your mind can ’ t think about upsetting things when it is focused on the breath. you can learn to use the breathing techniques whenever you feel stressed, fatigued, or anxious for immediate relief. yoga exercise benefits your entire circulatory system, beginning with the production of blood, which takes place in the marrow of the long bones in the thighs. improving circulation in the legs with daily yoga stretching exercises helps to rejuvenate the blood. yoga exercises stretch the body ' s major blood vessels, keeping them free - flowing and elastic ; yoga oxygenates the blood and pushes fresh nutrients to all peripheral vessels and capillaries. improved circulation means that your brain will receive more oxygen, improving alertness, memory, and mood ; vital organs receive a steady supply of the nutrients they need for optimal functioning. yoga relaxation and meditation training teach you how to relax at will, allowing your body to release muscle tension almost as it occurs. meditation training shows you how to access your inner source of strength and personal power, creating a support system that builds confidence and self - esteem, helps you learn to enjoy the present - moment, and increases self - awareness. the choice to practice yoga will help you control your high blood pressure as it contributes to greater general health and well - being


freeway noise can be much louder than expected over 300m in some atmospheric conditions ovenden, shaffer, frenando. impact of meteorological conditions on noise propagation from freeway corridors. j. acous. soc. am. 126 ( 1 ), july 2009, 25 - 35. this study combined field recordings and new acoustic modeling to describe the effects of wind shear and temperature differentials on the distance over which road noise exceeds regulatory limits. the particular concern here is whether reducing the height of barrier walls ( which is sometimes allowed when quiet road surfaces are used ) will lead to increased noise at a distance. this study could offer important additional information for use in recent us national park service efforts to understand the ways that road noise affects the " effective listening distance " of animals nearby. the results may also have applicability to some wind farm noise issues, though extrapolation from these results must be made with extreme caution. the essence of this study ' s results is that sound may bounce off a layer boundary that is caused by wind shear or temperature layers at 30 - 50 meters high ( a wind shear is a situation in which wind speed increases substantially with height, especially when there is a relatively sharp boundary between low and higher wind speeds ). most sound propagation models assume relative uniformity in the atmosphere ; this study aimed to see how propagation differs from traditional models when the atmosphere is more varied. in some conditions, the researchers here found that while sound levels remain close to what traditional sound models would suggest at ranges of 200 - 300 meters, noise levels can actually increase at ranges of 300 meters and beyond, creating conditions in which regulatory limits are exceeded at these greater distances. in some conditions, increases occur in chaotic patterns at closer ranges, as well. the difference between traditonal sound models and the results here were as high as 15 - 20db, and quite commonly occurred at 5 - 10db. while there is much interest in what may be causing reports of excessive noise from wind farms, and this work may inform these inquiries, it should be noted that the wind shears studied here may not apply to many industrial wind farms. most notably, the hub heights of turbines may well be above the level of the wind shears addressed here ( especially in problematic situations in which night time wind shears trigger turbines into action ), so that the noise is not reflected downward in patterns similar to those of ground - based noise such as traffic. however, there clearly are some atmospheric conditions in which wind farm noise is higher than expected, sometimes at surprisingly large distances,


into action ), so that the noise is not reflected downward in patterns similar to those of ground - based noise such as traffic. however, there clearly are some atmospheric conditions in which wind farm noise is higher than expected, sometimes at surprisingly large distances, so consideration of these effects would be a very useful topic for further study. it is quite possible that the turbine sound that does project down toward the ground during wind shear conditions is subject to the same factors that create chaotic and at times surprisingly high levels at larger distances ; this could partially account for unusually high noise levels reported by some neighbors at certain times. exciting new models for assessing and visualizing extent of noise impacts in the ocean clark, ellison, southall, hatch, van parijs, frankel, ponirakis. acoustic masking in marine ecosystems : intuitions, analysis, and implication. mar ecol prog ser, vol. 395 : 201 - 222, 2009. [ download ( pdf ) ] this has to be one of the most exciting papers i ' ve seen this year ; reading it was downright joyous, especially in contrast to decidedly unsatisfying previous attempts to address cumulative impacts of ocean noise ( mostly undertaken by large committees and resulting in vague and complex conceptual approaches that are nearly impossible to implement ). by contrast, here we have, at last, a clear and strikingly rigorous approach to assessing the impacts of ocean noise sources on the communication of whales. as promised in the introduction, the authors " present an analytical paradigm to quantify changes in an animal ' s acoustic communication space " and " a metric to quantify the potential for communication masking. " while of course, much uncertainty remains, both in some of the specific terms used in these metrics and in assessing the biological impact of reduced communication space, the tools provided here will open a vast and exceedingly useful new doorway for biologists and ocean managers. researchers will find much to work with in the suite of new metrics and relatively simple functions used to calculate them, including factors that reflect " ancient ambient " conditions as well as " present ambient " and " present noise sources ", a more nuanced twist on signal - to - noise ration called the " recognition differential ", acknowledgement of subtle biological inputs such as " signal processing gain ", and " potential communication space " for a sender, and for a receiver hearing multiple other animal senders …. this is just a hint of the power of these combined metrics, and surprisingly, most of the functions are really quite


gain ", and " potential communication space " for a sender, and for a receiver hearing multiple other animal senders …. this is just a hint of the power of these combined metrics, and surprisingly, most of the functions are really quite simple, though they do of course interact in complex ways. the present examples focus on the effects of low - frequency shipping noise on low - frequency communication by large whales, and incorporate differences in the specific frequency ranges used by the three species addressed ; the model can easily be used to address mid - or high - frequency noise sources and higher frequency animal sounds such as those used for echolocation. for the rest of us who are not designing new studies, though, the power of this approach is equally clear, and can readily inform both public awareness and policy - making. extending the nascent idea of " communication space " ( which has recently been introduced in terrestrial ecosystems by researchers at the national park service and colorado state ) into ocean habitats, we are presented with an intuitively obvious way to both imagine and assess the effects of ocean noise – measuring the area in which an animal can hear or be heard by others of its species. as its first application, this paper presents data from ongoing work at stellwagen bank national marine sanctuary offshore from boston harbor. there, a network of hydrophones is collecting soundscape data that allows researchers to both pinpoint and track the locations of whales and ships, along with the actual received sound levels throughout an extended area. by plugging this data into their new equations, the researchers are able to, for the first time, quantify the effects of shipping noise on local populations of fin, humpback, and right whales. the results are both fascinating and sobering. thanks to slightly different frequency bands used by each species, and the lower source level of right whale calls, the impacts of shipping noise on these three species vary substantially. on the day used for this initial analysis, two ships passed through the region ( an average of six ships has been noted here ). on a low - traffic day with two ships, the communication space for humpbacks were reduced by an average of 11 %, fins by 33 %, and right whales by a staggering 84 %. for most of the day ( from 5am until 5pm ), right whale communication space was diminished by 88 - 98 %. while we do not know how this vastly shrunken communication range affected the whales, the authors note that " we do know that these whales counter - call and use


until 5pm ), right whale communication space was diminished by 88 - 98 %. while we do not know how this vastly shrunken communication range affected the whales, the authors note that " we do know that these whales counter - call and use these episodes of calling to find each other and to aggregate, so one immediate cost is the loss of opportunities to form social groups. right whales form aggregations during mating and during feeding, so one likely cost is the loss of mating and feeding opportunities. " back to the science - advancement side of things, the authors stress that this metric provides " a critical missing link to the major current dilemma of assessing noise impacts " that can, for the first time, " quantify biological cost within an ecological framework. " they note that this model is a key step toward giving some practical form to the previous pcad ( population consequences of acoustic disturbance ) model proposed by the national research council in 2005. there is still uncertainty in some key variables. most strikingly, we don ' t know how far these species actually communicate ; while we know they can be heard for tens to hundreds of kilometers, limited studies have only confirmed communication exchanges in the range of 20km, which is used in this model for now ( if actual communication ranges are longer, as is entirely possible, then reductions in communication space would be much greater, especially for the fin and humpback whales ). the authors note it was 1971 when payne and webb first raised the question of whether shipping might reduce long - range communication for some large whales, and that " that hypothesis was ignored for a quarter of a century. " they conclude : " as the planet ' s dominant species, humans have choices to make. in the case of the ocean ' s acoustic ecological habitat, the choices we are making now have profound implications for the future of marine mammals. it is our opinion that the right choice cannot wait another 3 decades. " summary of human and natural noise in the sea john a. hildebrand. anthropogenic and natural sources of ambient noise in the ocean. mar ecol prog ser, vol. 395 : 5 - 20, 2009. [ download ] this is a good current overview of the known sources of both human and natural sounds that contribute to the cumulative background ambient noise level of the seas. for each noise source, the author includes frequency bands and source levels, as well as a sense of how widespread the source is. some lesser - considered noise sources are included, such as acoustic modems used to transmit data from industrial


of the seas. for each noise source, the author includes frequency bands and source levels, as well as a sense of how widespread the source is. some lesser - considered noise sources are included, such as acoustic modems used to transmit data from industrial and scientific sites at sea. the key omissions are sources that are still relatively rare, though increasing in number : undersea mining and oil and gas subsea processing installations. unlike a similar presentation to the iwc a few years ago, the author does not attempt the much harder challenge of calculating the total sound energy that each noise source contributes to the global ambient noise budget ( that paper ruffled some feathers by suggesting that seismic surveys may contribute nearly as much as shipping ; it is likely that there is not enough solid data to assess how much air gun sound actually moves from continental shelves and slopes into the ocean basins ). the paper also includes a good basic summary of sound measurement systems, and is a good starting place for those wishing to get up to speed on the diversity of ocean noise sources. the main take - away is familiar : at low frequencies, shipping is the dominant noise source ( with some indications that seismic surveys are contributing more as they move to deeper water ) and has impacts at ocean - basin scales ; in mid - frequencies, sounds travel tens of kilometers, with wave and wind sounds dominant ( with mid - frequency sonars from 300 ships, operating up to 10 % of the time each, also significant ) ; at high frequencies, sounds travel only tens to hundreds of meters, and the main source of noise is actually thermal noise of water molecules ( with depth - sounder sonars on many to most ships also a factor ). specific data that may be worth holding in mind includes source levels of two important low - frequency sounds. pile driving ( increasingly used for siting offshore wind turbines ) can be close to 200db at 100m, with repetition every 2 to 4 seconds ; since this takes place in relatively shallow waters, the impact is fairly local despite being low - frequency. shipping noise varies from 195db re upa2 / hz for fast - moving supertankers to 140db for small fishing vessels and 150 - 180db re 1upa for small private motorboats. also of note is that wind turbines, after installation, are relatively quiet : the highest tonal component yet measured is 151db re 1upa at 180hz, and broadband low frequency noise at four different wind farms was just 100 - 120db re 1upa. parks and sanctuaries :


are relatively quiet : the highest tonal component yet measured is 151db re 1upa at 180hz, and broadband low frequency noise at four different wind farms was just 100 - 120db re 1upa. parks and sanctuaries : collaborative noise management in protected areas leila t. hatch, kurt m. fristrup. no barrier at the boundaries : implementing regional frameworks for noise management in protected areas. mar ecol prog, vol. 395 : 223 - 244, 2009. [ download ] yet another excellent and ground - breaking synthesis, this one highlighting the similar challenges and opportunities present in managing protected areas on land and in the sea. the authors, one of whom works for the national park service, and the other a national marine sanctuary, have both been active in focusing on the noise intrusions and impacts relevant to their respective jurisdictions. this paper addresses several important themes and calls for a more integrated and dynamic approach to managing the acoustic resources in protected areas. it ' s well worth reading the entire paper, which includes many useful insights, ideas, and case studies, including cogent discussions of the various management challenges that need to be overcome ( including different cultures and priorities within agencies that need to collaborate, and a natural resistance to bringing more detailed and expensive - to - collect data requirements into eis processes that have been sufficient in the past ). here, i ' ll highlight a few of the key passages. this excerpt frames the impacts of noise in a concise and new way : " hearing extends animal awareness under all conditions, and is essential when vision is compromised. " " noise presents at least 4 threats : diversion of attention and disruption of behavior, habituation or ‘ learned deafness ’, masking of important signals, and spurious physiological stimulation. these threats present several costs : compromised physiological function, diversion of time and energy, failure to detect important cues, impaired acoustical advertisement and communication, and reduced utilization of important habitats or resources. all of these costs have consequences for fitness. " " terrestrial noise management is informed and encumbered by the history of community noise management. historical noise studies and regulations focused on maximum tolerable conditions for humans, in terms of health effects or annoyance. the concept of preserving a high quality acoustic environment has been largely ignored until very recently …. an enormous gulf separates the outstanding acoustical conditions that the nps is required to protect and the noise exposures that result in health effects or high levels of annoyance. " however, " in the marine realm, emerging noise management practices


very recently …. an enormous gulf separates the outstanding acoustical conditions that the nps is required to protect and the noise exposures that result in health effects or high levels of annoyance. " however, " in the marine realm, emerging noise management practices are not burdened by the history of community noise management …. the broad mandate of the national marine sanctuaries act provides a unique opportunity to create noise management practices and regulations that represent today ’ s best available science. " " parks and sanctuaries should be afforded heightened levels of noise protection. sanctuaries should become quiet refugia for species, as well as enhanced environments for the development of science and technology that promote the research and management objectives throughout the regions they occupy. " the authors note that current regulatory responses to noise are focused on the impacts of discrete sound sources on individual animals ; they encourage a broader view that would take into account the ways that effects on species ripple through an ecosystem ( e. g., effects on prey species will have an indirect but crucial impact on predators ). they summarize several leading - edge computer models that are capable of ever more accurate and dynamic modeling of multiple sound sources and entire populations of animals in a region ( though note that even these cannot yet take into account inter - relationships between species ). there is also a time - scale limitation on most current impact analyses : the five - year span of most permits. as examples of noise in protected areas, the authors discuss both data and management approaches taken in grand canyon national park and stellwagen bank national marine sanctuary ( in each case, the protected unit with the longest history of acoustic monitoring ). in the grand canyon, aircraft are audible for a third or more of the day in the entire park : " if a visitor does not want to hear aircraft at grand canyon, they need to be in a busy parking lot or near one of the rapids on the colorado river. " in stellwagen, low frequency noise in the shipping lanes " were > 82 db 50 % of the day and as high as 110 db 5 % of the day. " the paper concludes with for elements of a " common ground " that these case studies suggest as cornerstones of a constructive forward motion in managing noise impacts : - investment in expanded and continued acoustic monitoring, especially for " evaluating which sanctuaries contain relatively quiet versus relatively noisy conditions. " - development of new impact assessment tools, such as visual representations of acoustic data, and effective metrics with which to summarize and compare results. they stress


, especially for " evaluating which sanctuaries contain relatively quiet versus relatively noisy conditions. " - development of new impact assessment tools, such as visual representations of acoustic data, and effective metrics with which to summarize and compare results. they stress that these metrics are most useful when they relate directly to " functional consequences " for animals that are easy for managers to interpret and for the public to understand ( such as the newly emerging metric of reduced listening area ). new modeling techniques offer several advantages, including " a rigorous framework for spatial interpolation, when acoustical monitoring data are sparsely distributed. " the authors stress that the degree of uncertainty in the models ' results needs to be emphasized, and that " in the face of considerable scientific uncertainty, the precautionary principle should be applied to ensure that areas of designated national importance fulfill their protective mandates. " - enhanced interagency coordination. in particular, " noise should be addressed by emerging regional management frameworks ( i. e. the gulf of mexico program, west coast governors ’ agreement on ocean health, northeast regional ocean council ), and during the design, implementation and evaluation of protected areas. " - public engagement and education regarding the benefits of quieting natural areas. humpbacks avoid boat noise at nearly 5 miles sousa - lima and clark. whale sound recording technology as a tool for assessing the effects of boat noise in a brazilian marine park. park science 26 : 59 - 63. [ download ] using an array of pop - up recorders, this study was able to track eleven individual singing humpback whales and monitor their movements in response to four separate approaches by a tourist boats in the abrolhos marine national park off brazil, in the main humpback breeding grounds in the southwest atlantic. nine of the eleven whales moved away from the boat ; of these, four continued singing and five stopped singing ( these did not resume singing for at least 20 minutes ). six of the nine began moving away while the boat was more than 4km ( 2. 5mi ) away ; this distance was chosen as the onset of the " exposure " period, since it had been previously shown to be the median distance at which humpbacks respond to boats. in fact, the mean distance at which the nine whales began moving away was 7. 5km ( 4. 7mi ) ; previous studies have suggested that 8km is the greatest distance at which humpbacks would exhibit avoidance, with some studies suggesting they would not move until boats were within 300 meters. the authors note that


7. 5km ( 4. 7mi ) ; previous studies have suggested that 8km is the greatest distance at which humpbacks would exhibit avoidance, with some studies suggesting they would not move until boats were within 300 meters. the authors note that earlier studies suggesting whales would only move when boats are closer " could be a reflection of smaller sampling areas or specific close - range analytical designs, it could also be a bias toward less sensitive whales. " earlier, the authors point out that other research had proposed that " individuals that are most sensitive to boat approaches would abandon preferred areas because of increased boat disturbance. assuming this is true, only the individuals less sensitive to boat disturbances would remain in the area. " this is a proposition that is gaining increasing credence within the research community ( see bejder et all 2009, below ). the present authors continue, " the effect this selection for boat noise – habituated males could have on the population structure is unknown ; it could affect female choice and consequently the distribution of breeding success among the males of this population. " importantly, the authors note that " during the post - exposure period, singers were still moving away from the boat, which suggests a residual avoidance of the disturbance area. " overview of new autonomous ocean noise recorders for use in small and large areas van parijs sm, clark cw, sousa - lima rs, parks se, rankin s, risch d, van opzeeland ic. management and research applications of real - time and archival passive acoustic sensors over varying temporal and spatial scales. mar ecol prog ser, vol. 395 : 21 - 36, 2009. [ download ] very good overview of the range of recent research using acoustic recorders, including both archival systems ( deployed for weeks to years, with data downloaded periodically ) and real - time systems ( in which data is available on an ongoing basis remotely ). includes discussion of acoustic systems deployed in brazil, antarctica, the us, and norway, as well as a series of studies using towed hydrophone arrays in the pacific. the authors stress the importance of the different research designs and baseline information necessary to effectively study behavior that takes place on different scales, and suggest adaptation of long - standing terminology used in other fields to discuss relevant oceanic scales ( synoptic scales for regional marine areas of > 2000 km2, mesoscale as areas between 1 and ~ 2000 km2 in size and microscales as areas < 1 km2 ). the importance and the flexibility of these new technologies is well expressed in the


regional marine areas of > 2000 km2, mesoscale as areas between 1 and ~ 2000 km2 in size and microscales as areas < 1 km2 ). the importance and the flexibility of these new technologies is well expressed in the paper ' s conclusion : " archival and real - time passive acoustic arrays are now among the lowest cost approaches for mesoscale monitoring of marine areas and can be used to monitor vocal marine life in areas difficult to survey by traditional visual methods. fixed autonomous passive acoustic arrays sample continuously for prolonged periods of time, allowing assessment of seasonal changes in distribution and acoustic behavior of individuals without introducing into the environment the types of disturbances generated by the presence of survey vessels or aircrafts. unlike more traditional visual methods, passive acoustic technologies can survey in darkness and remain active during adverse weather conditions. further, the ability to retrieve and redeploy archival arus provides a level of flexibility in data acquisition that is not available with other fixed long - term monitoring systems. " whale watching boat noise and impacts on dolphins – including some key new findings on high levels of masking and sound peaks during frequent gear - shifting jensen, bejder, wahlberg, aguilar soto, johnson, madsen. vessel noise effects on delphinid communication. mar ecol prog ser, vol. 395 : 161 - 175, 2009. [ download ] this study was designed to determine how much the sounds of motorboats ( whale watching or private recreation ) reduce the communication ranges of dolphins and pilot whales. the researchers assessed natural background ambient noise in shallow ( dolphin ) and deep water ( pilot whale ) environments, as well as doing field measurements of the noise from two outboard motorboats, then deployed d - tags on pilot whales to assess received levels. the results reinforce some standard whale - watching guidelines, and highlighted some previously un - noticed impacts. engine noise at 5 knots and 50m ( typical limits for whalewatching ) did reduce communication ranges significantly : by 26 % in dolphins and 58 % in pilot whales ( living in quieter deepwater habitats ). slower speeds of 2. 5 knots produced virtually no masking noise, suggesting that at the closest ranges, slower speeds are important ( the authors take special note of the need for research vessels using " close follow " techniques to be aware of this, so as not to change behavior by their presence ). speeds of 10 knots produced dramatic reductions in communication range, even at 100 and 200 meters, though the researchers note more uncertainty about these results. in the tagging experiments


to be aware of this, so as not to change behavior by their presence ). speeds of 10 knots produced dramatic reductions in communication range, even at 100 and 200 meters, though the researchers note more uncertainty about these results. in the tagging experiments, the pilot whales experienced often extreme masking noise levels within pilot whale whistle frequencies, up to 55db above the levels that would begin to obscure communication ; which the authors note that this " suggest ( s ) that vessel noise may be an important factor in determining range of communication signals in this deep - water environment with significant whale - watching and commercial marine traffic activities. " in addition, whale watching boats shift shift gears quite often in order to remain in proximity of the dolphins or whales they are observing ( as often as 2 or 3 times a minute ) ; this study found that gear shifting creates pulses of much louder sound ( up to 200db re 1 upa peak - peak ) containing a much broader range of frequencies, especially higher frequencies. since such unpredictable bursts of sound tend to elicit more powerful short - term behavioral responses, " steps taken to lessen the erratic movement and number of gear shifts of vessels … would lessen the impact. " finally, the authors note that this study only addresses communications masking, and that, while not investigated here, some higher frequency noises created by cavitation ( especially at higher speeds ) " has the potential to impact foraging toothed whales by masking weak echoes from their echolocation signals. " acknowledging differing underlying values as a key to breakthroughs in conservation conflicts raphael d. sangarin and larry b. crowder. breaking through the crisis in marine conservation management : insights from the philosophies of ed ricketts. conservation biology, volume 23, no. 1, 24 - 30. [ download ] this short paper is well worth a read by all who have been frustrated by the lack of constructive progress in moving beyond contentious conflict in addressing environmental challenges. here, two contemporary researchers ( one with a focus on policy, and the other on marine conservation ) sketch the three - part approach of ed ricketts, a mid - 20th century marine ecologist ( immortalized as " doc " in steinbeck ' s cannery row ). in addition to his scientific work, ricketts articulated an approach to science and policy that drew from taoism, buddhism, and his friendships with steinbeck and joseph campbell. while the three aspects of rickett ' s approach are far more philosophical than practical, they bear consideration in light of the seeming


articulated an approach to science and policy that drew from taoism, buddhism, and his friendships with steinbeck and joseph campbell. while the three aspects of rickett ' s approach are far more philosophical than practical, they bear consideration in light of the seeming inability of the best intentions of both scientists and policy - makers to effectively turn the tide of ocean ecosystem collapse. at its heart, ricketts ' approach contains two key aspects. first, a clear and ongoing commitment to observing what is, rather than a focus on what should be – with a related emphasis on shifting relationships rather than facile attempts to assess simple cause and effect in what are always complex, holistic systems. central to this approach is a conscious intent to avoid neatly preconceived ideas about who or what is to blame for the problem under consideration. second, and most resonant for me, ricketts emphasizes that most intractable conflicts over policy are, at root, reflective of differing underlying priorities, worldviews, or " sacred values. " the key factor that drives " breakthroughs " is a shared commitment to be forthcoming about each party ' s underlying values. sharing the diverse " core needs " is, in ricketts ' view, the foundation of a constructive search for mutually favorable solutions, rather than a mutually damaging fight to chip away at two widely different, predetermined positions. the authors suggest that today ' s rapidly expanding toolbox of monitoring technologies provides us opportunities to initiate the sorts of ongoing observations that underlay ricketts ' approach, and that developments over the last generation in policy and public engagement support an attempt to be more explicit about the underlying values that are too often unspoken as competing advocates argue their sides in a fight to " win " in policy decisions which have turned unwittingly into battles, thanks to a simplistic focus on particular causes and effects within systems that are spinning out of control due to countless inter - related factors. as in his time, it is not altogether obvious how to apply ricketts ' ideas in practice, but reading this brief overview of his thoughts, along with the context provided in relation to current attempts to define and enact ecosystem based management in the oceans, is bound to spur some new perspectives among reflective policy players today. related : a key paper cited by sangarin and crowder is another short essay perspectives piece, which suggests that the repeated failure of worldwide fisheries management might be ameliorated by inverting the traditional " trophic pyramid " that places humans at the


key paper cited by sangarin and crowder is another short essay perspectives piece, which suggests that the repeated failure of worldwide fisheries management might be ameliorated by inverting the traditional " trophic pyramid " that places humans at the top, and instead using a model that puts humans at the bottom, or at the tipping point of a circle which explicitly includes consideration of three key factors : ethics, corporate responsibility, and social justice. bundy, chuenpagdee, jentoft, mahon. if science is not the answer, what is? an alternative governance model for the world ' s fisheries. front ecol environ 2008 ; 6 ( 3 ) : 152 - 155. [ download ] moderate seismic survey noise linked to increase in blue whale calling l. di lorio and c. w. clark. exposure to seismic survey alters blue whale acoustic communication. biology letters doi : 10. 1098 / rsbl. 2009. 0651 [ download ] this study found that a seismic survey in wide bay at the mouth of the st. lawrence seaway caused blue whales feeding and socializing nearby to double or triple their call rates. the calls were near - range communication signals, rather than the long, loud songs that are heard over hundreds of miles. the research was meant to simply learn more about these social calls, but during the study, their recordings began to pick up the pulses from a seismic survey. “ the whales made more calls on days when the testing was happening. it seems they are having to repeat themselves in order to not lose information, ” said lead researcher lucia di lorio. during the four days in which survey sounds were heard, the whales also increased their call rates when the sparkers were audible than when they were not, and tended to rapidly increase call rates when the sounds appeared. the results were especially surprising, since the survey in question was using a much lower - power sound source ( sparkers ) than the airguns used in most surveys. the electronic sparkers top out at only 190db, rather than the 230 - 240db of airguns. sparkers are slightly higher frequency as well, but still solidly centered in low - frequency bands of 30 - 450hz, primarily 60 - 250hz, very similar to airguns, and matching key blue whale communication frequencies. the study notes that “ our results clearly show that blue whales change their calling behaviour in response to a low - medium power technology that is presumed to have minor environmental impact. in fact


similar to airguns, and matching key blue whale communication frequencies. the study notes that “ our results clearly show that blue whales change their calling behaviour in response to a low - medium power technology that is presumed to have minor environmental impact. in fact, the mean sound pressure impinging on the ( study ) area, and thus probably on the whales present there, was relatively low, 131 db re 1 upa ( peak to peak, 30 – 500 hz ) with a mean sound exposure level ( sel ) of 114 db re 1 mpa2 s. the increase in calls was a contrast to some other studies, which have found call rates reduced near seismic surveys, perhaps in part due to animals moving away ; in some cases, animals call louder or change the pitch of their calls to cope with noise intrusions. this is the first study to find a marked increase in call rates, or repeating themselves, which di lorio suspects may be due to the key role of this area in socializing and feeding ( i. e., the communication is time - and place - dependent, and cannot easily be postponed until a quieter time ). the study concludes by noting that the st. lawrence estuary “ is an important feeding area where blue whales acquire energy and also a place where this wide - roaming, highly dispersed population congregates to engage in social interactions. reducing an individual ’ s ability to detect socially relevant signals could therefore affect biologically important processes. this study suggests careful reconsideration of the potential behavioural impacts of even low source level seismic survey sounds on large whales. this is particularly relevant when the species is at high risk of extinction as is the blue whale. ” update : a skeptical note received by email from a longtime correspondent : “ to me, given a detectable new sound, mammals tend to decrease vocalization if it induces fear, or increase vocalization if it stimulates interest. how a sparker could block communications rather eludes me, but whales responding to a pulse — be it noncoherent noise stimulates noise, or actual whale talk directed at the pulse — comes to mind …. sperm whales in the gom seemed to alter click patterns and perhaps anticipated a pulse once they got the beat. that was a casual observation by one of the acoustic team - always thought that would have been a great add - on study but we were already at overload working on acoustic tracking for tagging purposes. more at home, my grey parrot, who talks quite a bit, of course becomes completely silent when


habituation often misused or wrongly assumed in impact assessments bejder, samuels, whitehead, finn, allen. impact assessment research : use and misuse of habituation, sensitization and tolerance in describing wildlife responses to anthropogenic stimuli. mar ecol prog ser, vol. 395 : 177 - 185, 2009. [ download ] this paper serves as an excellent review of an important line of reasoning that is skeptical of facile claims that animals readily habituate to human disturbances such as noise. while the paper may be seen by some as little more than a set of " what if " propositions designed to undermine the simple observation of animals not being affected by a disturbance ( and in this way, proposing an extreme precautionary view that supposes the worst in situations where we do not have complete information ), the underlying intent is more serious than this : when policy decisions are being made based on a simplistic assessment of the situation, then we should at least be aware of the limitations of our terms and our study designs. this paper adds clarity to these issues in important ways. the authors distinguish between true habituation ( which is a learning process that occurs over time ) and tolerance ( which can be measured instantaneously ), and suggest that most impact studies are designed in ways that can only confirm tolerance, since they do not track the responses of individual animals over time. further, they point out that even studies of tolerance can be easily distorted if the most sensitive animals leave at the first disturbance, leaving more tolerant individuals as the " study group. " another key – and often ignored – factor is that any behavioral response is influenced by many factors, not just the invasive human disruption being studied ; for example, increased human noise may be one factor in an animal ' s decision about moving away, but this decision is also dependent on other key factors, such as the quality of the site where the animal current is ( e. g. for feeding, mating, resting ), the distance to and quality of other suitable sites, the relative risk of predation or density of competitors in other sites, and any investment the individual or group has made to the site ( e. g., establishing a territory, gaining dominant status, or acquiring environmental information ). it is commonly assumed that avoidance or lack of avoidance of a human sound source is a good indicator of whether that sound has a negative impact ; the authors stress that this is an unwarranted and often incorrect assumption, and point out that the few studies that


commonly assumed that avoidance or lack of avoidance of a human sound source is a good indicator of whether that sound has a negative impact ; the authors stress that this is an unwarranted and often incorrect assumption, and point out that the few studies that have assessed both behavioral responses and physiological measures ( heart rate, stress hormones ) have often found physiological markers of a negative response even when animals exhibited little or no behavioral reaction, i. e., when they appeared to tolerate the intrusion. this paper serves as a good starting point for examining previous research that has raised similar questions about the design of behavioral response studies, and the use of these studies in making policy decisions ( in particular, previous work by ja gill and l bejder ). the core message here is that managers should be very cautious in assessing claims of habituation ( since few studies truly are designed to prove habituation ), and likewise that habituation or tolerance do not necessarily imply the lack of negative impacts on individuals or populations. as they conclude, " most studies are restricted to monitoring short - term, observable, behavioral responses, ( which ) limits the scope of conclusions that can be drawn … the conclusion is likely to be specific only to the response variable that has been monitored … ( while ) animals may become habituated in one modality but not in another …. the most effective course of action in impact studies would therefore be to complement behavioral assessment with monitoring of physical condition and physiological measures such as heart rate, body temperature and / or hormonal levels. " " worst case " wind turbine noise can occur 30 % of summer / fall nights clifford p. schneider. measuring background noise with an attended, mobile survey during nights with stable atmospheric conditions. internoise 2009. [ download paper ( pdf ) ] this well - designed study, by a retired new york state department of the environment staffer, sheds light on several key questions surrounding standard noise assessments of wind farms. most strikingly, it quantifies the extent of one of the key atmospheric components of excessive wind farm noise, finding that stable night time atmospheres may occur two - thirds of the time in the summer and fall, with wind high enough at turbine height to trigger them into action on 30 % of nights, increasing to 40 % in june and july. on these " worst case " nights, turbine noise is likely to be significantly louder than local background ambient noise from late evening until the beginning of the pre - dawn bird chorus. schneider ' s study also included a brief but useful test of whether a quick but


conflict of interest in research on anthropogenic noise and marine mammals : does funding bias conclusions? marine policy 34 ( 2010 ) 320 - 327. ( ed. note : this lay summary includes more analysis and interpretation by aei than we generally include ; some of this commentary questions the conclusions of the paper, and some of it addresses the underlying controversies surrounding ocean noise issues. i have attempted to be clear about which statements are simple summations of the report ' s data and findings, and which are aei ' s reflections or perspectives. it is a long read, but the issues that triggered this study are important ones. though the clear - cut results reported here are difficult to take at face value, it is well worth considering the underlying forces that drive tensions between environmental groups and navy / industry actions in the seas. ) in the united states, the us navy funds about half of the research into the effects of ocean noise on wildlife. for many years, conservation groups have questioned whether this preponderance of funding is skewing research results, whether by constraining the types of questions being studied, or by leading researchers to downplay negative impacts of noise in order to continue receiving funding. this paper investigates the latter possibility, by comparing five recent reviews of the effects of ocean noise on wildlife, one funded by a leading environmental group, three that received substantial navy funding, and two funded by organizations with no particular stake in the debate. the researchers compared the number of citations in each that showed an effect of noise, or not, or that showed both an effect and lack of effect. they also attempted to identify funding sources of the primary papers cited in each of these secondary reports, and to correlate the funding source with the same three parameters ( noise shown to have an effect, noise causing no effect, or aspects of the primary research showing both effects and no effect ). using both simple citation counts and g - test statistical analysis to test for a null hypothesis of random connection between funding sources and outcomes, the authors report a significant correlation between funding source and proportion of citations reporting " no effect " of noise. the five review papers certainly show a trend, though it appears to aei that three papers that form the anchors of that trend each may be somewhat shaped by its original intention. reviews : proportion of citations of each stance the authors recognize that the one conservation - funded paper ( " oceans of noise ", wdcs ) drew almost only on studies that did show an effect of noise, and re - analyzed the trend with that


reviews : proportion of citations of each stance the authors recognize that the one conservation - funded paper ( " oceans of noise ", wdcs ) drew almost only on studies that did show an effect of noise, and re - analyzed the trend with that one excluded ; a significant effect remained, though it was half as strong. however, one of the " independent " papers, a chapter in a book on the ocean environment ( hildebrand ), was perhaps similarly constrained by its purpose ; it was titled " impacts of anthropogenic noise, " and was not necessarily intended as a comprehensive assessment of what does and does not cause an effect. on the other end of the spectrum of the five surveys, the only navy - funded survey that diverged notably from the other independent paper ( from ices ), was the third national research council report, which addressed the difficulties in determining when repeated behavioral disruptions of a portion of a population accumulates to the point of becoming " biologically significant. " thus, this survey could be expected to include more papers that were exploring the edges of impacts, and so it is not surprising that to do so, more citations would appear that show no effect. given these underlying intentions of the two reports showing the fewest " no effect " citations, and the one showing the most " no effect " citations, it appears that the five papers being compared are not quite on the same playing field. the other three papers ( ices and the first two nrc reports on noise and marine mammals ) showed no marked differences in balance between citations, with the navy - funded reports actually having a lower proportion of " no effect " papers and higher proportion of " effect " papers than the ices survey. primary papers : funding sources and results reported turning to the primary papers, the situation is not muddied by the variable intentions of the reviews. here, there is a clearer trend of increasing conclusions of " no effect " as funding moves from conservation to no - agenda to industry and military funding. again, the 19 conservation - funded papers nearly all reported an effect, with just one showing both effect and no effect to separate questions being investigated. the 67 military - funded papers, by contrast, were far more likely ( 2. 3 times as likely ) to come to a no - effect conclusion than papers funded by other ( non - conservation and non - industry ) sources. however, and significantly, less than 30 % of military - funded papers came to that conclusion, while about 50 % did report an effect of noise, and


- effect conclusion than papers funded by other ( non - conservation and non - industry ) sources. however, and significantly, less than 30 % of military - funded papers came to that conclusion, while about 50 % did report an effect of noise, and 20 % showed both effects and lack of effects. likewise, in the first two nrc reviews, about 20 % of citations showed " no effect, " while over 60 % showed an effect ; even the most " extreme " review had more citations showing an effect than not. of special note is that the authors did not find any strong trend toward bias of results reported by independent, academic researchers receiving navy funding for research studies - these studies showed a similar proportion of effect and no effect results as studies funded by neither the military nor conservation groups ( though when comparing military - funded studies with all the others, including consevation - funded, a non - statisticially significant trend of 1. 64 times more " no effect " findings was observed ). as the authors stress in consideration of the possible bias of conservation - funded primary studies, conflicts of interest would be dangerous if scientists " orient ( ed ) their goals, methods, analysis or interpretation towards the perceived interests of the …. community that funded them. " the authors conclude that " much of the bias in military - funded research was in work carried out at military institutions, rather than in studies funded by the military but carried out at universities and other institutions. " this seems to suggest that the concern about bias in funding alone is negligible, thus diffusing concerns that cash - strapped academic researchers are " cooking the books " to retain navy funding. research coming directly out of military offices is likely to remain less reliable as representing " the whole picture, " as may research entirely funded by conservation groups. still, by integrating and considering the full range of studies reported in all of these reviews, the public can get a pretty decent picture of current state of our understanding of the effects of ocean noise. of note, though, is that the proportion of " no effect " to " effect " findings is slightly lower in military - funded studies. in addition, military - funded studies are more likely to report both effects and lack of effects in a single paper ; this could indicate either a more careful assessment of the margins where effects are just noticeable, or a tendency to split the difference in order to either underplay the effects or accentuate the non - effects to assuage funders. overall, at both layers of analysis, it seems clear to ae


the margins where effects are just noticeable, or a tendency to split the difference in order to either underplay the effects or accentuate the non - effects to assuage funders. overall, at both layers of analysis, it seems clear to aei that the conservation - funded papers and survey report showed the most obvious " bias. " however, this is not necessarily problematic ( unless used as a baseline to suggest bias in others ). as the authors note, " conservation groups do not fund research unless they have previously identified a potentially damaging effect, " and since conservation groups ' focus on precautionary approaches, and their mandate to " publicize activities that are potentially damaging to the environment " is quite transparent, it " should not be problematic unless threats are ' hyped ' where there are none. " ( note : while non - existent threats are rarely hyped by conservation groups, a more difficult question arises when moderate or minor threats are presented to the public as more dramatic than they may be. ) the authors note that while these results could suggest that conservation funding may be considered problematic, " the argument can be made that their role as a preventative authority is necessary. " indeed, while primary research and even survey reviews funded by the military are evidently not overly biased toward finding no effect ( since in both cases, they include far more results showing effects than not ), it also appears to aei that in practical terms, the eis ' s generated by the navy and the mitigation measures imposed by regulators on both military and oil and gas activities are largely grounded in the belief – and regulatory determination – that any effects of these activities are " negligible, " to use the formal term. thus the focus of the conservation community on funding research and publishing overviews that emphasize credible studies outlining observed negative effects is understandable, given these groups ' role in raising public awareness and balancing the singular interpretation of the more nuanced research by the military and industry. it might be more fruitful to explore ways that the " balance " of navy - funded studies and reviews serve as a fig leaf for actions that nearly always presume no harm. another key question not yet considered with the rigor brought to this study is whether navy - funded research is oriented toward studies that, by the questions being asked, may be more likely to come up with " no effect " findings, as apparently the investigations that conservationists tend to fund ask questions that lean toward those that are likely to show an effect. similarly, the questions being asked


by the questions being asked, may be more likely to come up with " no effect " findings, as apparently the investigations that conservationists tend to fund ask questions that lean toward those that are likely to show an effect. similarly, the questions being asked can color the perceived importance of changing our ways of using sound in the sea. for example, a study might seek to identify " recoverable thresholds " of exposure ( the maximum sound can an animal experience, causing temporary hearing shifts, but with their hearing returning to normal after a few minutes or hours ), while another study may be looking for " behavioral thresholds " ( the sound exposure that triggers behavioral changes ). implicit in the first question is the thought that as long as the effect is not permanent, it ' s acceptable ; conversely, the second question implies a desire to minimize disturbance of animals. indeed, the first question seeks the maximum sound level we can feel comfortable imposing, while the second inquires as to the minimal sound that the animal might be affected by. more to the point, though, many or most of the studies that do show effects are somewhat ambiguous ( e. g., only a proportion of the population shows the effect, or the practical import of the change or effect is difficult or impossible to determine ), while a finding of " no effect " is more clear - cut. it is not outlandish on the face of it for the navy to say, as it does, that their actions are not likely to cause any major disruption of animal life : the only clear - cut evidence we have is that extremely loud sounds at very close range ( tens of meters ) can injure animals, while the rest of the research really is shades of grey. nearly all of the controversy over military and oil and gas noise today boils down to differing interpretations of how important moderate behavioral changes are, and whether they should be avoided or not. and science is nearly incapable of shedding any definitive light on how important behavioral changes are, thus leaving the two sides largely reliant on their divergent faith : the navy and oil industry ' s faith that the behavioral changes are transient and negligible, and environmentalists ' faith that chronic behavioral disruption by human noise is bound to have negative consequences. meanwhile, ethical questions about humanity ' s relationship to the natural world are outside the bounds of discussion on one side, and central to the whole discussion, on the other. in the end, studies like this – and indeed, reviews such as those considered here – are largely diligent


of sound. clownfish were found to detect sound from 75hz to 1. 8khz, and to be most sensitive to sounds below 200hz. it ’ s long been known that the sounds made by fish are closely related to their size, with lower frequency sounds made by larger fish. interestingly, younger ( i. e. smaller ) fish have best hearing sensitivity at frequencies lower than the sounds they make, but close to the dominant frequencies of larger fish calls. it is suggested that this allows juvenile fish to hear and localize the position of adults, which may be useful as juveniles return to their home reefs. offshore wind farms : impact area on porpoises is small during operation, but potentially over 20km during construction these two papers, from related research teams, assessed the impacts of construction and operation of wind farms in europe on local populations of harbor porposeis and harbor seals. tougaard, henriksen, miller. underwater noise from three types of offshore wind turbines : estimation of impact zones for harbor porpoises and harbor seals. j. acoust. soc. am. 125 ( 6 ), june 2009. 3766 - 3773. underwater noise was recorded from three different types of wind turbines in denmark and sweden. the authors note that virtually all airborne noise from the turbine blades is reflected off the surface of the water, while vibrations from the machinery are transmitted through the tower and into the foundation, from where it radiates out into the water column and seabed. in general, turbine noise was only measurable above ambient noise at frequencies below 500hz, with total spls of 109 - 127db re 1upa rms, measured at 14 - 20m from the turbines ’ foundations. by comparing measured sound levels with audiograms of harbor seals and harbor porpoises, the researchers determined that the sounds were only slightly audible for the porpoises at ranges of 20 - 70m, whereas harbor seals may hear the sounds at ranges of 100m to several kilometers. as a bottom line, researchers suggest that behavioral changes are very unlikely in harbor porpoises except at very close ranges, while seals may have some behavioral reaction out to a few hundred meters. for both species, masking is predicted here to be low to non - existent ( due to differences between vocalization frequency patterns and the predominantly low - frequency turbine noise ), and the sound is too low to cause physical injury, no matter how close the animals are. tougaard, carstensen, teilmann


existent ( due to differences between vocalization frequency patterns and the predominantly low - frequency turbine noise ), and the sound is too low to cause physical injury, no matter how close the animals are. tougaard, carstensen, teilmann, skov, rasmussun. pile driving zone of responsiveness extends beyond 20km for harbor porpoises ( phocoena phocoena ( l. ) ) ( l ). j. acous. soc. am. 126 ( 1 ), july 2009. 11 - 14. this study took place during construction of an offshore wind farm in the north sea. acoustic t - pods were placed in the wind farm and in two locations outside the wind farm, at 7 and 20km away. during pile driving operations, which generate high - intensity impulsive sounds ( 235db peak - peak ), detections of harbour porpoises declined at all listening stations. ( the baseline was detections during construction, but without pile driving activity taking place ) the declines were not dramatic ( within the 95 % confidence bars in most cases, barely beyond them in some cases ), but were consistently found. there was no clear difference in detection rates at 7 and 20km, which implies that the displacement effect extends well beyond 20km. the differences inside the wind farm were minimal when pile driving was occurring, though total detections were lower inside the farm than outside at all times, suggesting that animals inside the construction zone were individuals who were more acclimated or tolerant of the ongoing construction noise. a summary of recent studies of wind farm noise annoyance and possible health effects the take - away from these new reports appears to be that while significant proportions of the population are affected by moderate wind farm noise, neither increasing wind farm noise nor even annoyance to it lead inevitably to health effects. there is an entire separate body of research investigating various attitudinal aspects related to stress and health, which only muddy the waters as we try to interpret these direct studies on wind farm noise. some studies indicate that attitudes toward a noise source can affect both annoyance and stress responses, and that a subjective sense of being threatened can likewise increase physiological responses to noise ; however, once again, these correlations are far from universal, so they cannot be used to " explain away " either annoyance or health impacts that do take place, any more than annoyance can be used as a clear indication of eventual health effects. there is far more gray than black and white in these reports. still, they provide a concrete picture of annoyance and sleep


either annoyance or health impacts that do take place, any more than annoyance can be used as a clear indication of eventual health effects. there is far more gray than black and white in these reports. still, they provide a concrete picture of annoyance and sleep deprivation increasing as turbine noise increases, along with a better sense of the proportion of affected neighbors who will experience these impacts at various distances and received sound levels. clearly, 35 - 45db is a range at which impacts on neighbors become far more widespread. the social question that will need to addressed is what proportion of nearby neighbors we will accept causing sleep deprivation or annoyance in : 10 %? 20 %? where will we draw the line, beyond which we consider turbine placement too close? minnesota dept of health minnesota department of health, environmental health division. public health impacts of wind turbines. may 2009. [ download report here ] this state agency report provides a good overview of the current state of knowledge regarding wind farm noise propagation, with particular attention given to possible low frequency noise impacts. the report makes no dramatic recommendations, though the data presented suggests that audible and low - frequency noise could affect neighbors within a half mile to mile. among the key pieces of information contained in this report, gleaned from previous research studies : - a reminder that the 2007 report on wind farms and human health from the national academies of science concluded that " noise produced by wind farms is generally not a major concern beyond a half mile " ( i. e., under a half mile can be problematic ). - some individuals have extraordinary sensitivity to low frequency sound, up to 25db more sensitive than presumed ( average ) thresholds at some frequencies - some people can dismiss and ignore repetitive but low intensity noise, while for others, the signal will grow and become more apparent and unpleasant over time. these reactions may have little relationship to will or intent, and more to do with previous exposure history and personality. - the difference, in db, between soft ( acceptable ) and loud ( annoying ) noise is much less at low frequencies, due to the our perceptual compression of the full audible range. - compiled data from two recent swedish studies ( summarized below ) suggest that wind farm noise levels of over 40db ( a ) lead to annoyance in about half the population, while slightly lower sound levels of 35 - 40db ( a ) leads to annoyance in about a quarter of the population. - a surprising study from new zealand found that over half of household 2 - 2. 5km and 5 - 9. 5km from wind farms


sound levels of 35 - 40db ( a ) leads to annoyance in about a quarter of the population. - a surprising study from new zealand found that over half of household 2 - 2. 5km and 5 - 9. 5km from wind farms could hear them at times ( fewer in between heard them ) ; these wind farms were in mountainous terrain, which likely explains the great distances at which they could be heard. - two charts from a 2006 report by the uk department of transport and industry suggest that low frequency noise ( lfn ) from wind turbines can be well above audible levels, and above the uk ' s night noise lfn criterion, at frequencies of 50 - 200hz. summary of three european studies eja pederson. effects of wind turbine noise on humans. third international meeting on wind turbine noise, aalborg, denmark, june 2009. this review by one of the leading researchers of wind turbine noise, annoyance, and health, compiles data from three studies, two in sweden and one in holland. the results, while indicating clear thresholds for annoyance and sleep disruption at sound levels often experienced by wind farm neighbors, also illustrate the subtleties inherent in making generalizations based on ambiguous data. the author makes a key introductory point : that wind farms " often are placed in rural settings considered places with low exposure ( to ) environmental stressors …. in such a setting, even when the levels are comparably low, ( wind farm noise could ) be perceived as a potential health risk. " the heart of the studies shows a correlation between increasing noise levels and annoyance. this effect was clearly stronger in the two flat, rural areas, than in a study that took place in a more suburban, rolling landscape that had more other noises present. a dramatic increase in proportion of people annoyed by turbine noise took place when the noise was over 40db ( a ) ; here, 25 - 45 % reported annoyance in rural settings, and 10 % in the suburban area. at 35 - 40db, annoyance ranged from 16 - 20 % in rural settings but was only 5 % in suburban ; at 30 - 35db, annoyance hovered around 10 % in rural areas. the studies showed no direct correlation between noise levels and health effects related to stress ( including headaches, tiredness, tenseness, and irritability ) ; this is not surprising, since at all noise levels, a majority of the population was not annoyed, so also not likely to be stressed. among those experiencing annoyance, there was a correlation with


tiredness, tenseness, and irritability ) ; this is not surprising, since at all noise levels, a majority of the population was not annoyed, so also not likely to be stressed. among those experiencing annoyance, there was a correlation with stress effects, but it was far from universal ( correlations generally in the 1. 25 range ). sleep disruption from any source was reported by 15 - 20 % of rural respondents even at sound levels under 30db ; some may interpret this as evidence of impact from wind turbines at very low sound levels, but it could as well be considered a baseline of sleep disturbance from non - wind farm causes. at sound levels of 30 - 40db, 5 - 8 % more rural residents reported sleep disruption, and as levels rose above 40db, a total of 30 - 40 % of rural residents reported being awakened. more insight into noise perception and annoyance kerstin persson waye. perception and environmental impact of wind turbine noise. presentation at inter - noise 2009. this is another paper that re - analyzes results from the several previous studies, including the swedish and dutch ones cited above ( waye and pederson were co - authors of one of these earlier studies ), and adds several interesting and important points to the discussion. first, she cites studies that suggest that the swishing nature of turbine noise is especially problematic, leading to a much higher correlation with annoyance than simple db level measurements. indeed, even at sound levels of only 35 - 40db ( a ), when swishing was present, 45 % of respondents reported being " rather " or " very " annoyed ; over 20 % were similarly annoyed at 30 - 35db. waye delves too - briefly into studies addressing the connection between seeing turbines and being annoyed by them. this is an especially difficult question, but she cites studies suggesting very high correlations between visibility and annoyance, much higher than the related correlation between visibility and audibility. this ties into other studies suggesting that those who don ' t like seeing turbines, also don ' t like hearing them ; again, though, it ' s important to remember that even these strong correlations are not universal, and many who experience noise issues are content to see turbines, if they are far enough away to not create audible disruptions to their recreational, work, and sleep life. in parsing the data from the three studies also addressed by pederson, above, waye adds two key pieces of information : first, all these wind farms consist of relatively small turbines, by current


their recreational, work, and sleep life. in parsing the data from the three studies also addressed by pederson, above, waye adds two key pieces of information : first, all these wind farms consist of relatively small turbines, by current standards : 500 - 800kw. second, our consideration of annoyance thresholds at various db levels is greatly enhanced by also including a graph showing that, in addition to those annoyed at each sound level, another 40 - 70 % of the population could hear the turbines, but did not report annoyance. for example, at 30 - 35db, over half of rural residents reported hearing the turbines, while only 8 - 12 % were annoyed ; at 35 - 40db ( within most global regulatory limits ), 85 % heard them, while just under 20 % were annoyed ; and at 40 - 45db ( within common us regulatory limits ), 95 % heard them, while 45 % were annoyed. finally, waye addresses a commonly reported finding : that annoyance levels are higher for wind turbines than for noise from less dynamic industrial sources, such as factories. she cites a study that shows that annoyance when indoors is pretty much the same, but that outdoors in rural settings, annoyance is significantly higher at sound levels above 35db ( annoyance at the one suburban wind farm was nearly identical to that from factory noise, again suggesting that expectations in rural setting plays a key role ). waye suggests that in rural settings, recreational and " restorative " aspects of outdoor experiences are impinged upon by wind farm noise. a final fascinating tidbit in her paper is that people who move from cities to the country are significantly more sensitive to noise than people who had always lived in the country ; that is, those who actively chose to relocate to the country are more attached to the quiet nature of the landscape, while those who grew up there are more accepting of changes. ( ed. note : as with so many statistics in these studies, though, this should not be over - emphasized ; surely many long - time locals also struggle with noise impacts. indeed, the difference in sensitivity to noise, while an interesting finding, is just 15 % ) low - frequency active sonar annual report to nmfs annual report no. 1 : operation of the surveillance towed array sensor system low frequency active ( surtass lfa ) sonar aboard the r / v cory chouest and usns impeccable ( t - agos 23 ) under the national marine fisheries service letters of authorization of 15 august 2007. department of the navy