Published: 14.10.16 12:45
letter to the editor. At the meeting in hovedutvalget for technical in Its 20. september 2016 was the case about støyskjerming along the Vorma processed.
It was a surprising no to støyskjerming!
the Argument went, among other things, that støyskjerming would result in several metres of additional filling of the Vorma. Also, it would be little effect of a low støyskjerm.
there Should be some effect, it was claimed, had støyskjermen be three metres high and utfyllingene had to be increased by several feet extra into the river.
Also, was the concern for the snow clearing mentioned. Moreover, the requirement of a specific distance to the catenary and place to snølagring. It was not added by følgedokumenter that confirmed these statements.
Undocumented oral and uetterrettelig information at the last moment created uncertainty and affected thereby hovedutvalget to go in to support rådmannens and thus also The plan to not to do anything.
There is cause for concern. Not least because the information obviously must be based on the misconceptions that surrounded and misunderstandings.
the Facts are that even with a low støyskjerm one will be able to achieve a noise reduction of at least 10 db. It was given the impression that this is negligible. It’s not! 10 db is on the contrary a significant noise reduction.
This is confirmed by the Norwegian association against noise. They write in a note to us: “the Noise from the electric trains at those speeds, 100-200 km/h, is dominated by noise, wheel-rail track. A støyskjerm will provide significant reduction if it is so high that it hides the lower half of the trains.
A støyskjerm along a rail can be placed closer to the source than is the case along a main road. This, and the fact that the støykilden predominantly found close to the ground, making sure støyskjermen need not be made so high in order to have effect.
There are transparent noise barriers. They must, of course, be washed at certain intervals in order to remain transparent, but the need is far less than along roads with sølesprut and road dust from road traffic.”
the Norwegian national rail administration writing even in the Norwegian national rail administration the Norwegian action plan against noise: “the Noise has the best effect when they can be placed as close as possible to støykilden. Low noise will therefore be considered and applied in the development or renewal of the stretches. Low noise barriers have absorbent material and is sufficiently close to the track that through to dampen the reflections between the screen and the sideskjørtet on the train can give an equally good effect as the usual 2-3 metre high noise barriers in the normal distance from the track.”
the Norwegian national rail administration writing so that there is no difference in the effect of low and high støyskjerm.
It may well not be any difference in effect in Bergen and along the Vorma.
Also: contact with the Norwegian Path states that will not be necessary with extra fillings to put up noise barriers at all. Noise barriers can be set up between the kontaktledningsmastene without having to go out into the river.
Thus, almost point blank, until skinnegangen.
On questions about what is considered low støyskjerming is the answer ranging from 0, 75 centimeters – thus covering hjulhøyde, and optionally, up to just below the vindushøyde.
There are several løsningsvarianter:
Some massive
Some transparent
Some massive with a transparent top
Some sinuous
Here, there is much that should be examined and considered.
Besides being rid of most of the snow by blowing it over the støyskjermen. So not a problem.
And JBV driver as well not with snølagring, as it is mentioned above. Snow on the skinnegangen they will probably either get rid of it as soon as possible. Why it was then argued that it was made, is and remains a riddle. Likewise the conclusion. It seems to us that there should be many good reasons why both rådmannen and hovedutvalget for technical should look at this again.
Bjørn Solheim
Preserve Mjøsas and Vormas long sandy shore
Loading…
No comments:
Post a Comment