GrowNYC

Research linking loud sounds to hearing loss in youngsters is now widespread, resulting in the issuance of warnings to protect children’s hearing. However, studies attesting to the adverse effects of intrusive sounds and noise on children’s overall mental and physical health and well-being have not received similar attention.This, despite the fact that many studies have demonstrated that intrusive noises such as those from passing road traffic, nearby rail systems, and overhead aircraft can adversely affect children’s cardiovascular system, memory, language development, and learning acquisition. While some schools in the United States have received funds to abate intrusive aircraft noise, for example, many schools still expose children to noises from passing traffic and overhead aircraft. Discussion focuses on the harmful effects of noise on children, what has to be done to remedy the situation, and the need for action to lessen the impacts of noise from all sources. Furthermore, based on our knowledge of the harmful effects of noise on children’s health and the growing body of evidence to suggest the potential harmful effects of industrial wind turbine noise, it is strongly urged that further studies be conducted on the impacts of industrial wind turbines on their health, as well as the health of their parents, before forging ahead in siting industrial wind turbines.

In a study of the conservation behavior of 103 grocery shoppers in Chelsea, Michigan, an information and prompting strategy was used to test various rationales for adopting source reduction behavior. The experimental intervention consisted of mailing an educational pamphlet to participants. The experimental design included four treatment groups: a control and three others. These three other treatment groups each received a pamphlet giving environmental, economic, or a combination of environmental and economic rationales to reduce waste at the source. From data collected in pre-and postintervention survey instruments, it was shown that both environmental and economic rationales for practicing source reduction led to significant increases in reported source reduction behavior. Additionally, the type of conservation behavior promoted (e.g., toxics use reduction) and the location in which it is practiced (i.e., at home, at a store) were found to have an impact on the success of the interventions. Participants were more likely to adopt home-based source reduction of nontoxics over either store-based activities or activities involving toxics use reduction.