Categories
Asia Noise News

Vietnam: HCM City residents claim noise pollution tortures them at home

HCM CITY (VNS) — Noise pollution from street eateries, public broadcasting speakers, and neighbourhood karaokes has made hundreds of HCM City residents feel as though they are being tortured in their homes.

While affected residents said they could not stand the noise, local authorities in the effected areas claim they have carried out proper measures.

Ngo Hai Thanh (not her real name), a resident in the city’s District 12, said she has lost sleep for two weeks because of the noise from customers at a street eatery set up on in front of her home.

“The period from 8pm to midnight is the peak time for the eatery. Noise from tens of customers becomes a nightmare,” said Thanh, adding that sounds made during cleaning before the caterers leave the site for home ruin her final attempts to sleep.

Thanh works in a lawyer’s office and insomnia reduces her productivity.

In Viet Nam, street food is often served with alcohol, and people drinking alcohol speak louder than normal. To cheer their drinking, Vietnamese have their own slogan, “1-2-3-dzo,” which is a noisy trademark for Vietnamese street eaters and a nightmare to the ears of those who are not sitting at the table drinking alcohol.

Bach (not her real name), an elderly woman who is a resident of District 1’s Tran Quang Khai Street, said noise from eateries on the street causes her illness to worsen. Bach is 80 years old and had heart surgery just weeks ago.

“The eateries stay open until 3:00 in the early morning. Some of these people vomit and urinate on my fence, as well,” she added.

Meanwhile, residents in other areas of the city feel that noise from public broadcasting speakers can become unendurable. Since reunification in 1975, authorities installed loud speakers in every community for broadcasting daily news twice a day, in the early morning and at the twilight.

The speakers made a meaningful contribution during the hard times when people could not afford a TV set, a radio or a daily printed newspaper.

“I really need deep sleep after each hard night’s shift, but they turn the loud speakers on at 5:20am every morning. This causes me to suffer from insomnia,” said Tran Thanh Tuan (not his real name), a resident in suburban Binh Chanh District.

Tuan added that the speaker noise scares his son, awakening him, also.

Residents in Tan Phu District complained that they are fed up with the noise from karaoke, which is quite popular in the district.

Meanwhile, officials in the areas said they have dealt with complaints for many years and issued fines to those making noise. Dang Hai Binh, deputy head of District 12’s natural resources and environment division, was quoted by Tuoi Tre (Youth) newspaper as saying his office had hired individual teams to measure noise levels and issue fines.

However, Binh admitted that customers in eateries obeyed rules only when officials came to check. Afterwards, the noise continues, he said.

Further, Le Ton Thanh, deputy director of HCM City Department of Culture, Sports and Tourism, told the newspaper that monitoring noise pollution is the responsibility of ward authorities. The city authorities, in their licensing process, have regulated permitted noise levels.

Cao Chi Tam, a community head in Binh Chanh District, said loud speaker systems are required for the propaganda of the ‘new’ rural model meant for suburban and rural areas. He promised to reduce the street noise.

However, while officials spoke of restrictions applied to licensed karaoke services and authorised public speakers, no one has proposed a solution for noise from street eateries, which are found on almost every street in the city. — VNS

Source: http://vietnamnews.vn/

Categories
Asia Noise News

Noise barriers for PIE stretch Singapore

Noise barriers for PIE stretch Singapore

Noise barriers will be tested for the first time along an “at-grade” section of an expressway next year.
The 6m-high barriers will run for about 400m along the edge in each direction of the Pan Island Expressway (PIE) next to Swiss View and Greenbank Park.

The Land Transport Authority (LTA) is calling a tender today and work will start next year.

“The location was selected because this stretch of the PIE has recently been widened, bringing the carriageway closer to residents,” LTA said.

Holland-Bukit Timah GRC MP Sim Ann said she has been pushing for noise barriers for the residents living next to the PIE.

“Among the neighbourhoods I look after, the Swiss View and Greenbank Park areas have been the most exposed to heightened traffic noise, and I welcome the fact that noise barriers will be installed at these locations first… LTA has heard us,” said Ms Sim.

The transport authority said the project will help to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of implementing noise barriers along at-grade sections of expressways.

Unlike viaducts and flyovers, at-grade sections often have roadside trees, lamp posts, signs, drains and uneven terrain – all of which can prevent construction of barriers, or limit their effectiveness, said LTA.

Since last year, the LTA has been testing the use of noise barriers. These were installed along Anak Bukit Flyover last October and LTA is also building them along West Coast Highway near Block 44, Telok Blangah Drive, and the new flyover along Braddell Road, near Block 138, Bishan Street 12.

“While these noise barriers are not intended nor designed to completely block out traffic noise, the trial will… allow for an evaluation of overall effectiveness and visual impact of such barriers,” LTA said.

LTA will also test the use of a low-noise road surfacing. It will study whether the inclusion of materials such as latex and rubber in the current asphalt mix can help to reduce traffic noise, which comes mainly from the friction between vehicle tyres and the road surface.

The durability of the new road surfacing will also be evaluated. Development of the new surfacing is expected to start next year.

Source: http://news.asiaone.com/

Categories
Asia Noise News

With New Environmental Protection Tax, the Polluter Now Pays in China too, also for noise pollution !

With New Environmental Protection Tax, the Polluter Now Pays in China too, also for noise pollution !

After decades of devotion toward economic and industrial development, China is beginning to address the environmental concerns that have pained the nation in recent years. China’s Environmental Protection Law, which came into force early 2015 and increased factory liability for pollution, may soon by followed by a new “Environmental Protection Tax” (EPT). China’s EPT is in its exposure draft stage until July 9, 2015, during which the public may submit comments.

The EPT is a culmination of the efforts of China’s Ministry of Finance, State Administration of Taxation, and Ministry of Environmental Protection. Companies operating within China should take caution to remain current on EPT draft policy, as it imposes strict tax regulations on polluting companies, as well as harsh penalties for violators.

As it stands now, the EPT is to further increase company responsibility for pollution within China, whether in the form of air, water, solid, or noise pollution. Minimum taxation amounts for pollution will be established on a national level. However, provincial governments will have the discretion to raise tax minimums to better mitigate the environmental concerns of the particular province.

Calculating Pollutant Tax

Measuring Pollutants

In order to accurately measure the quantity of pollutant emitted, companies will be permitted to install a State-approved pollution discharge monitoring device. The pollution discharge quantities recorded by the machine will be used to later determine the appropriate pollution tax amount to be imposed on the company.

In the event that a company does not purchase a pollution discharge monitoring device, a State-approved pollution monitoring institution will calculate pollution emission amounts.

Pollutant Equivalent Values

Pollutant Equivalent Values (EPVs) are numerical constants used in calculating EPT. Each different pollutant type is assigned its own EPV. For example, pollution through mercury emission has an EPV of 0.0005, while the EPV of carbon monoxide pollution is 16.7. Companies should familiarize themselves with relevant EPVs in order to anticipate the effects of the pending EPT legislation.

Calculations

Companies can calculate individual air and water pollutant emission tax by dividing the quantity of the pollutant discharged by the corresponding EPV. The number produced is referred to as the “pollution equivalent” and is then multiplied by specific tax rates set by the government.

For example, a company looking to calculate tax on 1000 kg of mercury would divide the 1000 kg by 0.0005 (mercury’s EPV). This calculation equates to a pollution equivalent value of two million, which is then multiplied by mercury emission current tax rate of RMB 1.2. After multiplying two million by RMB 1.2, the final tax on 1000 kg of mercury emission would total RMB 2,400,000.

Noise pollution due to construction is calculated at a rate of RMB 3 per one square meter of construction. However, pollution due to industrial noise is calculated based off the number of decibels the industrial noise exceeds standards established by the government. Industrial noise tax can range from RMB 350 per month (one decibel above standard) to RMB 11,200 per month (18 decibels above standard).

Solid waste taxation is determined by the amount produced, and ranges from RMB 5-30 per ton depending on the specific solid pollutant emitted.

Tax Exemptions

It is important to note that not all pollutant discharges within a company will be subjected to the new taxation. Water pollutants will be divided between heavy metals and remaining toxins, and only the five highest heavy metal pollutant equivalents and three highest remaining toxin pollutant equivalents will be taxed. Similarly, only a company’s air pollutants with the three highest pollutant equivalents will feel the effects of taxation.

Additionally, any company which empties pollutants in urban wastewater treatment plants or urban domestic waste treatment plants is exempt from the EPT. Pollution produced from vehicles, ships, trains, and planes, and agricultural production (except large scale) is not covered either.

Tax Collection

The current EPT draft states that tax collection should occur at the location where the pollution is discharged. China’s tax authorities have the discretion to choose how frequently the tax will be collected, either on a monthly, quarterly, or annual basis.

In the event that a company emits pollution irregularly, the tax will be collected on a case by case basis.
Taxpayers must be careful to strictly follow tax collection procedures, as violations can lead to fines of up to five times the tax amount unpaid. China’s environmental protection departments also maintain the right to investigate and review any suspicious activities of companies operating within China at their own discretion.

Conclusion

As China turns its attention toward environmental protection, companies must be sure to stay current on China’s most recent legislation. The pending EPT is likely another step in the process to restore China’s environment, and companies unprepared for the adjustment may find themselves struggling to adapt to the changing industrial climate.

Source: By Elizabeth Leclaire, http://www.china-briefing.com/

Categories
Asia Noise News

Airports of Thailand pushes ahead with 140 billion-baht expansion plan, Environmental Health Impact Assessment on the way. Noise nuisance ?

BANGKOK, 30 June 2015 – The Airports of Thailand (AOT) is pushing ahead with the Suvarnabhumi and Don Muang expansion plan in a bid to increase the capacity of airport terminals.

The AOT is revising the major expansion plan with a budget of 140 billion baht. The construction on both airports is expected to be completed in 2021. After the expansion, the two airports will be able to handle up to 120 million passengers a year.

(Environmental Health Impact Assessment: EHIA).

According to the AOT, Phase 2 of the Suvarnabhumi expansion plan has been approved by the cabinet, with a budget of 55 billion baht. The plan to construct a third runway is undergoing an Environmental Health Impact Assessment( EHIA), and would involve payouts to nearby communities for the increase in noise pollution.

For Don Muang, the AOT has plans to build a new concourse and renovate Terminal 1 and 2. The Terminal 2 is set to be re-opened in September. The Red Line’s electric train will also be connected to Don Muang airport’s Terminal 1.

– See more at: http://www.pattayamail.com/business/airports-of-thailand-pushes-ahead-with-140-billion-baht-expansion-plan-48532#sthash.Systfk9g.dpuf

Categories
Asia Noise News

Japan: Residents near Futenma base in Okinawa win ¥754 million in damages over noise

NAHA, OKINAWA PREF. – The Okinawa branch of the Naha District Court ordered the government on Thursday to pay some ¥754 million in damages to residents near the Futenma air base because of aircraft noise.

Some 2,200 plaintiffs who live close to the controversial U.S. base in Ginowan complained of mental distress, poor sleep and disruption to their daily lives.

In seeking about ¥1 billion in damages from the central government, they also said they feared aircraft crashes, according to lawyers representing the plaintiffs and their lawsuit.

“The noise damage suffered by the plaintiffs is serious and widespread,” presiding Judge Satoshi Hikage said in the ruling, adding that the court found that the damage reached an unacceptable level.

The judge acknowledged that the base serves the interest of the people in the country, and that it can only be served with the sacrifice of a minority of people. But he said that does not mean they should accept the damage. The use of the air base by the U.S. military therefore “violates the rights of the plaintiffs.”

The ruling comes as Japan and the United States are seeking to move Futenma to a less densely populated area further north on Okinawa Island and return the land at Ginowan to Japanese control. Local opposition is running high, however, and many people in Okinawa want the base moved outside the prefecture altogether.

“I’m relieved that damages were awarded,” said Sogi Ganaha, a plaintiff in the suit who lives about 300 meters from the base. “Whenever I hear the roaring of a helicopter circling above my head, I remember the war 70 years ago. I’ve wanted to get compensated for my daily suffering.”

Okinawa Gov. Takeshi Onaga, an opponent of the plan to relocate Futenma within the prefecture, hailed the ruling as “meaningful.”

Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga argued the government had failed to fully explain its arguments to the court.

“We will adequately deal with this after coordination among the ministries and agencies concerned,” he said at a news conference.

The suit follows a similar one filed by local residents in October 2002. In that case, the Fukuoka High Court ordered the government in July 2010 to pay about ¥369 million in damages to the plaintiffs. But it rejected their plea to suspend early morning and evening flights.

The latest suit was filed in 2012 by individuals who were not plaintiffs in the earlier case.

During the trial, the government sought an exemption and to reduce the sum of compensation, arguing that some of the plaintiffs had moved to the area knowing that an air base existed there, and that the government had taken measures to reduce noise, such as funding noise abatement work on homes.

The plaintiffs’ damages were reduced as the court recognized that the government’s noise abatement measures had been effective, to some extent.

The court also dismissed the claims of around 80 plaintiffs who lived in areas where the noise level is below 75 on the Weighted Equivalent Continuous Perceived Noise Level, or WECPNL, an internationally recognized index for aircraft noise.

The decision was in line with the 2010 Fukuoka High Court ruling, in which the WECPNL of 75 or above formed the benchmark for ordering government compensation.

The court did not acknowledge the suffering the plaintiffs said was caused by low-frequency sounds from helicopters, citing a lack of evidence.

Thailand