06-09-2016, 09:44 AM
1453111410-BODYFINALCopy.doc (Size: 7.08 MB / Downloads: 17)
1.1 Project Overview
1.1.1 Introduction
Every year, tens of thousand of people worldwide lose their lives to ailments that can be traced to environmental pollution arising principally from the release of toxic effluents into the atmosphere and surrounding ecosystems. Jonah et al (2009) pointed out that noise pollution has now been recognised as a serious threat to the quality of life enjoyed by the larger population. It is with these facts in mind that this project work was undertaken in order that a veritable document on environmental pollution indices of the major towns of Niger State would be produced.
1.1.2 Environmental Pollution
Environmental pollution is the contamination of the earth’s environment with materials that interfere with human health, the quality of life, or the natural functioning of the ecosystem (living organisms and their physical surroundings). Whilst some environmental pollution is a result of natural causes (such as volcanic eruptions), most are caused by human activities. Environmental pollution has been classified into different categories that include air pollution, water pollution, solid pollution, hazardous pollution, and noise pollution (Encarta, 2007). Pollution, in its different forms, degrades the environment and affects the quality of life of the organisms that depend on this environment for survival; this especially holds true for the interaction of man and his environment. As humans become more skilful and adept at exploiting their environment, it becomes obvious that certain practices are quite detrimental to the health of the environment.
1.2 Environmental Noise and its Health Hazards
1.2.1 Introduction
Noise pollution or environmental noise is displeasing human or machine created sound that disrupts the activity or happiness of human life. Noise health effects are the health consequences of elevated sound levels. Elevated noise level at work place or other noise can cause hearing impairment, hypertension, ischemic heart disease, annoyance, sleep disturbance and decreased school performance. Changes in the immune system and birth defects have also been attributed to noise exposure (www.wikipedianoise_health_effects).
1.2.2 Hearing Loss
The most significant health problem caused by noise pollution is hearing loss (i.e. deafness). Any noise appreciably louder than talking can damage the delicate ear cells in the cochlea. Hearing loss is somewhat inevitable with age. However, it has been pointed out that due to loud music and a generally noisy environment, young people in the United States have a rate of impaired hearing 2.5 times greater than their parents and grand parents (Schmid, 2007). The mechanism of hearing loss arises from trauma to sterocilia of the cochlea, the principal fluid-filled structure of the inner ear. The pinna combined with the middle ear amplify sound pressure levels by a factor of twenty, so that extremely high sound pressure levels arrive in the cochlea, even from moderate atmospheric sound stimuli (Henderson et al., 2006).
1.2.3 Cardiovascular Effects
Noise has been associated with important cardiovascular health problems (Ising et al, 1999). In 1999, the World Health Organization concluded that the available evidence suggested a weak association between long-term noise exposure above 67-70dB (A) and hypertension (Berglund et al, 1999). More recent studies have suggested that noise levels of 50dB (A) at night may also increase the risk of myocardial infraction by chronically elevating cortical production (Maschke, 2003; Franssen et al, 2004).
1.3 Vehicular Emission and their Health Hazards
1.3.1 Introduction
The large minority of today’s cars and heavy duty vehicles travel by using internal combustion engines that burn petrol or other fossil fuels. The process of burning petrol to power cars and heavy duty vehicles contributes to air pollution by releasing a variety of emissions into the atmosphere. Emissions that are released directly into the atmosphere from the exhaust pipes of cars and trucks are the primary sources of vehicular pollution. Motor vehicles also pollute the air during the process of manufacturing, refueling, and from the emissions associated with oil refining and distribution of the fuel they burn. Primary pollution from motor vehicles is pollution that is emitted directly into the atmosphere, whereas secondary pollution results from chemical reaction between pollutants after they have been released into the air.
1.3.2 Vehicular Emission Concept
The concept of vehicular emission in this instance refers to the operational similarity between cars or heavy vehicles and engines or generators which utilize combustion of hydrocarbon fuel principles for operation. The word ‘vehicular’ present in the title of this study is a generic term that also refers to the aforementioned devices or mechanisms, hence the integration of this section to prevent a literal interpretation of the word.
The combustion of hydrocarbon fuels in vehicles as well as generators and some other devices is incomplete, hence the emission of harmful fumes. These fumes were discovered to be composed mainly of seven gases, each of theses gases was measured and this represents the information present in the gas data log.
1.3.3 Ingredients and Associated Risk of Vehicular Pollution
The following are the major pollutants associated with motor vehicles and their associated risks:
Ozone (O3): The primary ingredients in urban smog, ozone is created when hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides (NOx), both of which are chemicals released by automobile fuel combustion, react with sunlight. Though beneficial in the upper atmosphere, at the ground level ozone can irritate the respiratory system, causing coughing, chocked and reduced lung capacity.
Particulate Matter: These particles of soot, metals and pollen give smog its murky color. Among vehicular pollution, fine particles (those less than one-tenth the diameter of a human hair) pose the most serious threat to human health by penetrating deep into lungs. In addition to direct emissions of fine particles, automobiles release nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, and sulphur dioxide, which generate additional fine particles as secondary pollution.
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx): This vehicular pollutants can cause lung irritation and weaken the body’s defences against respiratory infection such as pneumonia and influenza. In addition, they assist in the formation of ozone and particulate matter. In many cities, NOx pollution accounts for one-third of the fine particulate pollution in the air.
Carbon monoxide (CO): This odourless, colorless gas is formed by the combustion of fossil fuels such as gasoline. Cars and trucks are the source of nearly two-thirds of this pollutant. When inhaled, carbon monoxide blocks the transport of oxygen to the brain, heart, and other vital organs in the human body. Newborn children and people with chronic illness are especially susceptible to the effects of carbon monoxide.
Sulphur Dioxide (SO2): Motor vehicles create this pollutant by burning sulphur-containing fuels, especially diesel. It can react in the atmosphere to form fine particles and can pose a health risk to young children and asthmatics.
Hazardous Air Pollutants (Toxics): These chemical compounds, which are emitted by cars, heavy duty vehicles, refineries, gas pumps, and related sources have been linked to birth defect, cancer, and other serious illnesses.
1.5 Problem Statement and Objectives of Study
1.5.1 The Problem: At present, not much is known about the overall environmental pollution problem of Niger State, especially the levels of pollution in the major towns of the state. Without a doubt, it is now generally accepted that the menace of environmental pollution poses serious risks to the health of the general populace.
1.5.2 Research Objectives: The principal research objectives of this project work are as follows:
i. The research result would be tailored towards general enlightenment whence the government and the general populace would be made aware of the hazards of environmental pollution in the major towns of Niger State.
ii. At the end of this exercise, a reference document (a sort of “environmental atlas” or “environmental map”) for the different precincts or wards of the different towns surveyed would be produced. The final document would highlight the various environmental pollution indices for the areas surveyed.
1.6 Justification of Project Work
This study is predicated on the recent work of Jonah et al (2007); they carried out a study of environmental noise levels within Abuja metropolis. In their work they recommended that the scope of environmental studies should be expanded in future works and that such studies ought to be replicated in major urban centers across Nigeria.
1.7 Scope and Limitation of Study
For this survey, the major towns of Niger State were partitioned according to the available cadastral maps. The cadastral maps were procured in sheets, and on each of these sheets the settlements layouts are clearly shown; these sheets formed the basis of the survey guides for the research team members. From the outset it was clear to the research team members involved in this study that a significantly huge amount of resources would be expended in order to achieve a full-scale coverage of the designated study areas. However, such a detailed full-scale coverage was not possible for this project work owing to the inability of the research team members to secure funding for this planned objective. Nevertheless, sufficient dataset have been obtained by the students in order that the principal objectives could be met.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Jonah et al (2009) pointed out that only a limited amount of research works have been carried out in Nigeria with respect to noise level measurements within Nigerian cities. The same argument can also be made for measurements regarding vehicular emission within Nigerian cities. On noise measurements, Abumere et al (1999) carried out a study to investigate noise pollution within Port-Harcourt City. Their research concluded that noise exposure limits in Port-Harcourt City exceeds the value recommended by the International Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA), i.e. 70dB. They suggested some strategies for limiting noise levels in Port-Harcourt city. Menkiti (1976) highlighted the fact that the incidence of impaired hearing in Nigeria could be blamed on exposure to noise (Abumere et al, 1999). Onuu and Menkiti (1993) have analyzed the spectra of road traffic noise for parts of southeastern Nigeria and they concluded that this type of noise dominates the low frequency range, 500-800Hz (Abumere et al, 1999).
Extensive noise measurement surveys in large cities such as New York (Free, 1926), Milford, Massachusetts (Wesler, 1972), Patras, Jeddah City (El-Shakway and Aboukhasaba, 1983), and other locations (Olson, 1972; Meister, 1957) have been carried out. The general conclusion was that the community noise levels were influenced primarily by surface traffic along major thoroughfares within the cities (Abumere, et al., 1999). Studies of both traffic noise and noise in communities situated close to major airports have concluded that elevated blood pressure, heart disease, and psychological trauma are direct consequences of noise exposure. Although these associations have been reported, others contradict or do not bear them out. Hypertension, heart disease and psychological trauma, as well as irritation and annoyance can be engendered by a variety of risk factors or by several operating simultaneously. Accordingly, establishing direct causal relationships can be exceedingly difficult. If research studies are methodologically deficient, complications arise to further confound relationships between the independent variable noise, and such dependent variables as elevated blood pressure, reading impairing, annoyance, anxiety, accidents, and heart disease. Obviously, with the number and variety of factors known to contribute to these events, there is good reason for contradictory results. One example of psychological trauma is the research of Jenkins and his group at the London Institute of Psychiatry (Jenkins et al., 1979). Their conclusions were based on the findings of two studies conducted in the area of London in Heathrow Airport. These studies had compared rates of admission at Springfield Psychiatric Hospital among residents living near Heathrow. Findings suggested that areas closest to the airport, with presumably higher levels of noise, also had the highest rates of hospital admission.
Noise is not simply a problem for those trying to sleep. Well- designed, well-controlled studies have demonstrated that exposure to high levels of environmental noise can adversely affect reading ability in school-age children. Maser, et al 1978 reported that children who attended school beneath the Seattle-Tacoma airport in-flight paths showed a deficit on standardized tests of scholastic achievement compared to students in quiet schools.
Sleep disturbances are probably the most widespread source of annoyance caused by noise, if anecdotal responses are any criteria. French investigators (Vallet, 1979) studied the problem under real-life conditions in bedrooms of people living close to freeways and airports. Using miniaturized electronic units they recorded EEG, eye movements, muscular activity, and heart rhythm with remote-reading equipment. Noise inside the rooms was recorded continuously. With the noise from the highways, subjects took longer to fall asleep and had less deep sleep so that the young to middle-aged group became more like the 50-60-year old group in their depth of sleep. Rapid eye movement (REM) sleep was also reduced. If both deep and REM sleep are physiologically and psychologically important, this type of alteration may well be damaging. But this remains to be substantiated by further study.
According to the investigations of Cohen and colleagues (Cohen, et al., 1973) reading and maths scores of third grade students in noise abated classrooms were higher than those in classrooms with higher noise levels. Some time ago, Green and co-workers (Green et al., 1982) of New York University’s Institute of Environmental Medicine found that for all elementary schools in boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens "an additional 3.6% of the student in the noisiest schools read at least one year below grade level". They went on to remark that "the dose response relationship indicated that the percent reading below grade level increased as noise level increased." Other researchers have found the same kind of relationship. For example Cohen and colleagues (Cohen et al., 1973) determined that elementary school students living for at least 4 years in the lower floors of an apartment complex near heavy traffic show greater impairment of reading ability than children living on higher floors away from the traffic. In the studies, indoors sound levels varied from 66-dB on the lower floors of an apartment to 55-dB on the higher floors. In a U.S. EPA classification, "noisy residential areas" averaged 58-dB and were rated low socioeconomic, while "quiet residential" averaged 38-dB and were rated affluent neighborhoods. These, of course, were outdoors sound levels. With indoor levels of 55-66-dB, concentration, the ability to pay attention, may well be difficult to nonexistent. If that is true, it may be pertinent to ask why far more children are not reading impaired.
Peterson and co-workers (Peterson and Northwood, 1981) of the University of the Miami School of Medicine appeared to demonstrate in rhesus monkeys that moderate levels of realistic noise can produce sustained elevations in blood pressure without significant alterations in the auditory mechanism. The unique aspect of this investigation was the finding that changes in auditory sensitivity did not necessarily follow changes in such physiological parameters as blood pressure. Given the concern over noise, one wonders just how desirable a quiet town would be. Darlington, near Newcastle, England, was almost such a place. Between 1976-1978, Darlington was designated a "quiet town experiment" (Gloag, 1980). Noise abatement zones and better traffic management was instituted, as were vehicle noise testing and stricter enforcement of noise regulations.
Sudden and unexpected noise has been observed to produce marked changes in the body, such as increased blood pressure, increased heart rate, and muscular contractions. Moreover, digestion, stomach contractions, and the flow of saliva and gastric juices all stop. Because the changes are so marked, repeated exposure to unexpected noise should obviously be kept to a minimum. These changes fortunately wear off as a person becomes accustomed to the noise (Broadbent, 1957). However, even when a person is accustomed to an environment where the noise level is high, physiological changes occur. The fact that noise has psychological effects is undoubted. The question is how these effects can be assessed and whether they lead to damage. No clear case has been made thus far for psychological damage caused by moderately high levels of noise, the levels that would cause hearing damage to only a small fraction of the people exposed. Indeed, fears have been expressed that ". . . over emphasis on damage may backfire when people come to realize that the truth of the matter seems to be simply that people can express violently their dislike about being disturbed by noises. This is recounted vividly by Connell (1972):
. . . A middle-aged woman living in Soho became affected by the incessant noise from a newly open discotheque. She complained to the management, the police, the local authority but nothing was done to reduce the noise. Her action took the form of suicide. In Italy a 44 year old man took an overdose of drugs because his eleven children made too much noise while he was watching the Olympic Games on television. . . In a quiet part of Middlesex with an ambient noise level of 30 to 40 decibels lived Fred, a lusty, healthy builder’s laborer. The M4 Motorway was built within a few feet of his cottage home. The resultant traffic caused the noise level to rise to 80 and 90 decibels so this poor man suffered an increase of 100,000 times in the noise level. He took it for some weeks. Discovered there was nothing he could do about it and his action was also directed against the self. He left a note which read "The noise; the noise; I just couldn’t stand the noise"… These are clearly extreme cases of reaction to the intrusion of noise into one’s life. But without question the ubiquitousness of the intrusion, even if less severe or less fatally resented, leads to demands for acoustic privacy which are psychologically no less important than those for visual privacy (Cohen, 1969).
In his study of vehicular emission, environmental and health implications, Enemari (2001) pointed out that vehicular emissions in typical urban centres constitute over 60% of the total pollutant emission compared to what anyone will naturally hope, think or assumed. He recommended for proper servicing of vehicles for optimal performance and this should be encouraged. Also, he recommended that the refineries in the country should be fully evaluated with the aim of redesigning them to produce entirely unleaded petrol in the very near future. Furthermore, the use of catalytic converters in vehicles that uses unleaded petrol to control photochemical seeding was recommended.
Bishop and Stedman (1996) have pioneered and developed an instrument to remotely measure vehicle emissions. In several studies it has been found that about 10% of the fleet generates more than 50% of total emissions of carbon monoxide (CO). Most cars are clean but a small number of malfunctioning or tampered with vehicles produce a major amount of regulated and un-regulated emissions. Idle tests are generally known to be a poor indicator of true emissions. In Finland the periodic inspection intervals have increased and therefore several years can pass without emission testing.
In a work by Field (1993), published in the Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, he stated that noise has an immense physiological effect. He pointed out that noise increases the levels of stress hormones such as cortisol, adrenaline and noradrenaline in the body, these are hormones responsible for a whole lot and they also determine temperament. The Microsoft Encarta (2008) sataed that most hearing loss occurs in workplaces, whereworkers may be unable to avoid unhealthy noise, and where exposure may continue for years. Factory workers, construction workers, farmers, military personnel, police officers, firefighters, and musicians all have reason to be concerned about their occupational exposure to noise. Even at levels below those that cause hearing loss, noise pollution produces problems. Noise makes conversation difficult, interferes with some kinds of work, and disturbs sleep. As a source of stress, it can promote high blood pressure and other cardiovascular problems, as well as nervous disorders. Noise also puts stress on domestic animals and wildlife. In remote areas, helicopters and military aircraft often frighten animals. Aircraft noise in Alaska, for example, has been shown to reduce the survival rate of caribou calves. There is concern that increasing noise levels in the oceans may confuse the natural sonar that whales use to navigate, communicate, and locate food.
Ouise (2002) has addressed the negative effects resulting from the exposure to road traffic noise on people’s well being. Following observations, the writer said annoyance was one of the first and most direct reaction on environmental noise, and that the continuous exposure of people to road traffic noise lead to suffering from various kinds of discomfort; this he said reduced the number of their well being elements. He also said his conclusion was still determined by non-acoustical factors like sensitivity, socio-economic situation and age. He reported that certain quantitative relationship between the objective quantities characterizing road traffic noise was established. Finally, he pointed out that the importance of these findings could be in more efficient ways of planning road traffic activity, in order to secure provide some succour.
In 2008, the result of a multi-institutional team commissioned by The Department of Energy at The Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute (LRRI), led by Dr. Joe Mauderly, to study comparisons of health hazards from engine emissions, materialized. In conjunction with LRRI’s Dr. Jeanclare Seagrave, Dr. Kevin Whitney (Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas.), Dr. Barbara Zielinska (Desert Research Institute) the following discoveries were made:
- Some little-studied hard-to-sample “semi-volatile organic compounds” (SVOCs) caused both lung inflammation and cell damage in lungs.
- By acquired statistics, Dr. Mauderly, discovered that at equal doses, the inflammation caused by normal gasoline and diesel emissions was nearly identical.
- Thus, considering emission rates and toxicity, emissions from black smocking gasoline, high-emitting diesel and white smoking gasoline vehicles presented approximately 10, 30, and 70 times the health impact per unit of vehicle travel (e.g per mile).
- He also revealed for the first time, that high emitters contribute even more disproportionately to the public health burden of vehicular emissions.
He then, encouraged researchers to be concerned with measurements of both cancerous and non-cancerous effects, and encouraged on getting high polluting vehicles out of the neighborhoods, for cleaner technologies. Finally Mauderly highlighted brighter prospect in that more efficient emission control was well underway, and that the study had not yet finished providing valuable information; as determining the specific chemical species in engine emissions that cause the health effects.
Shih (1971) saw noise as sound with little or no periodicity, with its essential characteristic of undesirability. He then defined noise as any annoying or unwanted sound. Also pointed out that the rapid increase of noise level in the environment was a national public health hazard, and that noise affects man’s state of mental, physical and social well-being, saying it was a type of air pollution. The author saw his work as an attempt to arrive at the understanding of the general situation on the problem of noise, being then, a rather new subject among other branches of science. His survey consisted of four major parts: the present status of noise pollution, its sources, its effects, and the control. Finally he listed terminology and bibliography relating to noise pollution problems.Mahandiyan (2006) discussed the causes, evils, legislation and controls of pollution; he pointed that it is the first time, when environmental and technological advancement leads to human demise. The author stated further that, pollution of any kind is a slow poison, but ‘environmental noise’ is one such pollution, which is harmful to humans.The book also stated that in a long series of labour laws in India, the noise pollution is left unattended, and it was not until 1987 when environmental noise was recognised as a pollutant in India.