Resource Documents by Acoustic Group
Acoustic Group
Results of an Acoustic Testing Program – Cape Bridgewater Wind Farm
A number of findings arise from the study and have been grouped as follows. 11.1 Non-acoustic findings The following non-acoustic findings of the study are considered to be significant: The resident’s observations and identification of sensation (separately to vibration and noise) indicates that the major source of complaint from the operation of the turbines would appear to be related to sensation rather than noise or vibration. A significant sensation disturbance was found to be occurring when the turbines were seeking . . . Complete article »
Acoustic Group
Peer review of Cherry Tree Wind Farm noise assessment
Conclusions: Sonus has relied solely upon the NZ Standard and has ignored the acoustic characteristics that residents will actually receive as a result of the Cherry Tree Farm. They have not addressed the actual acoustic impact of the wind farm on the community. The Sonus acoustic assessment provides a set of predicted noise levels in terms of the A-weighted values set out in the Standard and concludes that there are no tonal or modulation characteristics requiring modification to the predicted . . . Complete article »
Acoustic Group
Peer review of Collector Wind Farm noise assessment
The Marshall Day Acoustics report is similar to that provided by that organisation for other wind farms and would appear to fall into a generic type of report, subject to the additional requirements of the draft NSW guidelines to consider night time operations separately to day time operations under “worst case scenarios” and dB(C). The report appears to be more comprehensive than other generic “acoustic reports” accompanying wind farm applications. However there are a number of issues arising from this . . . Complete article »
Acoustic Group; GHD
Review of Noise Impact Assessments — Stony Gap
CONCLUSIONS Marshall Day Acoustics has relied solely upon the EPA Guidelines and has ignored the acoustic characteristics that residents will actually receive as a result of the Stony Gap Wind Farm. They have not addressed the actual acoustic impact of the wind farm on the community. The Marshall Day acoustic assessment provides a set of predicted noise levels in terms of the A-weighted values set out in the Guidelines and concludes that there are no tonal or modulation characteristics requiring . . . Complete article »
Acoustic Group
Review of NSW Draft Wind Farm Guidelines
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In late 2011 The Acoustic Group performed a desk-top review of the acoustic documents comprising the acoustic assessment for the Flyers Creek Wind Farm and conducted preliminary sound monitoring at an existing operational wind farm (the Capital Wind Farm) which was approved in New South Wales on the basis of similar analyses, guidelines and reports to that provided for the Flyers Creek Wind Farm. The assessment found deficiencies and inadequate information in the acoustic assessment of the Flyers . . . Complete article »
Acoustic Group
Peer review of acoustic assessment, Flyers Creek wind farm
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Acoustic Group has performed a desk-top review of the acoustic documents comprising the acoustic assessment for the Flyers Creek Wind Farm. Further, The Acoustic Group has conducted preliminary sound monitoring at an existing operational wind farm (the Capital Wind Farm) which was approved in New South Wales on the basis of similar analyses, guidelines and reports to that provided for the Flyers Creek Wind Farm. The conclusions of the Acoustic Group are set out below. The Background . . . Complete article »
Also try:
Search all of documents for "Acoustic Group".
Search entire site for "Acoustic Group".