Underwater Noise Review: For Saoirse Wave Energy Limited

Underwater Noise Review
For Saoirse Wave Energy Limited
www.rpsgroup.com
UNDERWATER NOISE REVIEW
Quality Management
Prepared by CEng, BSc (Hons), Technical Director 14/11/2022

MIOA, ASA
Reviewed &
Consultant 14/11/2022
checked by
Associate
Authorised by 14/11/2022
Director
Date of Issue 14/11/2022 Report Number JA2339–REPT–01–R0
Revision History
Rev Date Status Reason for revision Comments
0 19/11/2020 Draft for comment - -
01 27/11/2020 Final
02 14/12/2020 Final for submission
Final for updated
03 06/12/2021
submission
DISCLAIMER
RPS has used reasonable skill and care in completing this work and preparing this report, within the terms of its brief
and contract and taking account of the resources devoted to it by agreement with the client. We disclaim any
responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the stated scope. This report is confidential to
the client and we accept no responsibility to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. The
opinions and interpretations presented in this report represent our reasonable technical interpretation of the data
made available to us. RPS accepts no responsibility for data provided by other bodies and no legal liability arising
from the use by other persons of data or opinions contained in this report.
Except for the provision of professional services on a fee basis, RPS does not have a commercial arrangement with
any other person or company involved in the interests that are the subject of this report.
COPYRIGHT © RPS
The material presented in this report is confidential. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the client
and shall not be distributed or made available to any other company or person without the knowledge and written
consent of the client or RPS
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022
www.rpsgroup.com
Contents
1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................4
2 Acoustic Concepts and Terminology ............................................................................................5
3 Review of Sound Propagation Concepts ......................................................................................8
4 Assessment Criteria......................................................................................................................12
Effects of sound on Marine Mammals .............................................................................................12
Effects of Sound on Fish .................................................................................................................17
5 Review of Survey Sound Sources ...............................................................................................20
Geophysical Surveys.......................................................................................................................20
References .................................................................................................................................................27
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022
www.rpsgroup.com
Tables, Figures and Appendices

Tables
Table 4.1: Marine mammal hearing groups (Southall et al., 2019)
Table 4.3: Summary of PTS onset acoustic thresholds (Southall et al., 2019).
Table 4.4: Summary of Fish Injury Exposure Criteria for Seismic Airguns
Table 4.5: Summary of Fish Injury Exposure Criteria for Sonar
Table 5.1: Typical MBES source levels
Table 5.2: Typical sidescan sonar source levels
Table 5.3: Typical non-impulsive (sonar-based) SBP survey source levels
Table 5.4: Typical impulsive SBP survey source levels
Figures
Figure 2.1: Graphical representation of acoustic wave descriptors
Figure 3.1: Lower cut-off frequency as a function of depth for a range of seabed types.
Figure 3.2: Absorption loss coefficient (α), dB/km (pH 8, 5 ºC, salinity 35 ppt).
Figure 4.1: Hearing weighting functions (Southall et al., 2019).
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022
www.rpsgroup.com
1 Introduction
1.1 Noise is readily transmitted underwater and there is potential for sound emissions from the
geophysical surveys to affect both fish and marine mammals. At long ranges the introduction of
additional noise could potentially cause short-term behavioural changes, for example the ability
of cetaceans to communicate and to determine the presence of predators, food, underwater
features and obstructions. At close ranges and with high noise source levels, permanent or
temporary hearing damage may occur, while at very close range, gross physical trauma is
possible. This appendix provides an overview of the potential effects due to underwater noise
from the survey on the surrounding marine environment.
1.2 This report provides an overview of the potential effects due to underwater noise from the
proposed surveys on the surrounding marine environment. Because the exact survey
methodology and equipment specification is to be confirmed at a later procurement stage, this
report presents a quantitative overview of likely impacts due to underwater noise from a typical
range of surveys over the potential survey areas. As such, no detailed underwater noise
modelling has been conducted.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 4|Page
www.rpsgroup.com
2 Acoustic Concepts and Terminology

2.1 Sound travels through water as vibrations of the fluid particles in a series of pressure waves. The
waves comprise a series of alternating compressions (positive pressure variations) and
rarefactions (negative pressure fluctuations). Because sound consists of variations in pressure,
the unit for measuring sound is usually referenced to a unit of pressure, the Pascal (Pa). The unit
usually used to describe sound is the decibel (dB) and, in the case of underwater sound, the
reference unit is taken as 1 μPa, whereas airborne sound is usually referenced to a pressure of
20 μPa. To convert from a sound pressure level referenced to 20 μPa to one referenced to 1 μPa,
a factor of 20 log (20/1) i.e. 26 dB has to be added to the former quantity. Thus, a sound pressure
of 60 dB re 20 μPa is the same as 86 dB re 1 μPa, although care also needs to be taken when
converting from in air noise to in water noise levels due to the different sound speeds and densities
of the two mediums resulting in a conversion factor of 62 dB. All underwater sound pressure levels
in this report are described in dB re 1 μPa. In water, the sound source strength is defined by its
sound pressure level in dB re 1 μPa, referenced back to a representative distance of 1 m from an
assumed (infinitesimally small) point source. This allows calculation of sound levels in the far-
field. For large distributed sources, the actual sound pressure level in the near-field will be lower
than predicted.
2.2 There are several descriptors used to characterise a sound wave. The difference between the
lowest pressure variation (rarefaction) and the highest pressure variation (compression) is the
peak to peak (or pk-pk) sound pressure level. The difference between the highest variation (either
positive or negative) and the ambient pressure is called the peak pressure level. Lastly, the root
mean square (rms) sound pressure level is used as a description of the average amplitude of the
variations in pressure over a specific time window. These descriptions are shown graphically in
Figure 2.1.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 5|Page
www.rpsgroup.com
Figure 2.1: Graphical representation of acoustic wave descriptors
2.3 The rms sound pressure level (SPL) is defined as follows:
𝑇
1 𝑝2
𝑆𝑃𝐿𝑟𝑚𝑠 = 10𝑙𝑜𝑔10 ( ∫ ( 2 ) 𝑑𝑡)
𝑇 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑓
0
2.4 Another useful measure of sound used in underwater acoustics is the Sound Exposure Level, or
SEL. This descriptor is used as a measure of the total sound energy of an event or a number of
events (e.g. over the course of a day) and is normalised to one second. This allows the total
acoustic energy contained in events lasting a different amount of time to be compared on a like
for like basis. Historically, use was primarily made of rms and peak sound pressure level metrics
for assessing the potential effects of sound on marine life. However, the SEL is increasingly being
used as it allows exposure duration and the effect of exposure to multiple events over a 24 hour
period to be taken into account. The SEL is defined as follows:
𝑇
𝑝2 (𝑡)
𝑆𝐸𝐿 = 10𝑙𝑜𝑔10 (∫ ( 2 ) 𝑑𝑡)
𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑓
0
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 6|Page
www.rpsgroup.com
2.5 The frequency, or pitch, of the sound is the rate at which these oscillations occur and is measured
in cycles per second, or Hertz (Hz). When sound is measured in a way which approximates to
how a human would perceive it using an A-weighting filter on a sound level meter, the resulting
level is described in values of dBA. However, the hearing faculties of marine mammals and fish
are not the same as humans, with marine mammals hearing over a wider range of frequencies,
fish over a typically smaller range of frequencies and both with different sensitivities. It is therefore
important to understand how an animal’s hearing varies over the entire frequency range in order
to assess the effects of sound on marine life. Consequently, use can be made of frequency
weighting scales to determine the level of the sound in comparison with the auditory response of
the animal concerned. A comparison between the typical hearing response curves for fish,
humans and marine mammals is shown in Figure 2.2. It is worth noting that hearing thresholds
are sometimes shown as audiograms with sound level on the y axis rather than sensitivity,
resulting in the graph shape being the inverse of the graph shown. It is also worth noting that
some fish are sensitive to particle velocity rather than pressure, although paucity of data relating
to particle velocity levels for anthropogenic noise sources means that it is often not possible to
quantify this effect.
Figure 2.2: Comparison between hearing thresholds of different marine animals and humans.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 7|Page
www.rpsgroup.com
3 Review of Sound Propagation Concepts

3.1 Increasing the distance from the noise source usually results in the level of noise getting lower,
due primarily to the spreading of the sound energy with distance, analogous to the way in which
the ripples in a pond spread after a stone has been thrown in.
3.2 The way that the noise spreads will depend upon several factors such as water column depth,
pressure, temperature gradients, salinity, as well as water surface and seabed conditions. Thus,
even for a given locality, there are temporal variations to the way that sound will propagate.
However, in simple terms, the sound energy may spread out in a spherical pattern (close to the
source) or a cylindrical pattern (much further from the source), although other factors mean that
decay in sound energy may be somewhere between these two simplistic cases.
3.3 In acoustically shallow waters1 in particular, the propagation mechanism is coloured by multiple
interactions with the seabed and the water surface (Lurton, 2002; Etter, 2013; Urick, 1983;
Brekhovskikh and Lysanov 2003, Kinsler et al., 1999). Whereas in deeper waters, the sound will
propagate further without encountering the surface or bottom of the sea, in shallower waters the
sound may be reflected from either or both boundaries (potentially more than once).
3.4 At the sea surface, the majority of sound is reflected back into the water due to the difference in
acoustic impedance (i.e. sound speed and density) between air and water. However, scattering
of sound at the surface of the sea is an important factor with respect to the propagation of sound
from a source. In an ideal case (i.e. for a perfectly smooth sea surface), the majority of sound
wave energy will be reflected back into the sea. However, for rough waters, much of the sound
energy is scattered (Eckart, 1953; Fortuin, 1970; Marsh, Schulkin, and Kneale, 1961; Urick and
Hoover, 1956). Scattering can also occur due to bubbles near the surface such as those
generated by wind or fish or due to suspended solids in the water such as particulates and marine
life. Scattering is more pronounced for higher frequencies than for low frequencies and is
dependent on the sea state (i.e. wave height). However, the various factors affecting this
mechanism are complex.
1
Acoustically, shallow water conditions exist whenever the propagation is characterised by multiple reflections with both the sea
surface and seabed (Etter, 2013). Consequently, the depth at which water can be classified as acoustically deep or shallow
depends upon numerous factors including the sound speed gradient, water depth, frequency of the sound and distance between the
source and receiver.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 8|Page
www.rpsgroup.com
3.5 Because surface scattering results in differences in reflected sound, its effect will be more
important at longer ranges from the source sound and in acoustically shallow water (i.e. where
there are multiple reflections between the source and receiver). The degree of scattering will
depend upon the water surface smoothness / wind speed, water depth, frequency of the sound,
temperature gradient, grazing angle and range from source. Depending upon variations in the
aforementioned factors, significant scattering could occur at sea state 3 or more for higher
frequencies (e.g. 15 kHz or more). It should be noted that variations in propagation due to
scattering will vary temporally (primarily due to different sea-states / wind speeds at different
times) and that more sheltered areas (which are more likely to experience calmer waters) could
experience surface scattering to a lesser extent and less frequently than less sheltered areas
which are likely to encounter rougher waters. However, over shorter ranges (e.g. a few hundred
meters or less) the sound will experience fewer reflections and so the effect of scattering should
not be significant. Consequently, taking into account the sheltered location and likely distances
over which injury will occur, this effect is unlikely to significantly affect the injury ranges presented
in this report, although it is possible that disturbance ranges could vary depending on local and
seasonal conditions.
3.6 When sound waves encounter the seabed, the amount of sound reflected will depend on the
geoacoustic properties of the seabed (e.g. grain size, porosity, density, sound speed, absorption
coefficient and roughness) as well as the grazing angle and frequency of the sound (Cole, 1965;
Hamilton, 1970; Mackenzie, 1960; McKinney and Anderson, 1964; Etter, 2013; Lurton, 2002;
Urick, 1983). Thus, seabeds comprising primarily mud or other acoustically soft sediment will
reflect less sound than acoustically harder seabeds such as rock or sand. This will also depend
on the profile of the seabed (e.g. the depth of the sediment layer and how the geoacoustic
properties vary with depth below the sea floor). The effect is less pronounced at low frequencies
(a few kHz and below) and so might not be a significant factor to take into account with respect
to noise from sonar based geophysical surveys (where most of the acoustic energy is at
frequencies of kHz). A scattering effect (similar to that which occurs at the surface) also occurs
at the seabed (Essen, 1994; Greaves and Stephen, 2003; McKinney and Anderson, 1964; Kuo,
1992), particularly on rough substrates (e.g. pebbles).
3.7 Another phenomenon is the waveguide effect which means that shallow water columns do not
allow the propagation of low frequency sound (Urick, 1983; Etter, 2013). The cut-off frequency
of the lowest mode in a channel can be calculated based on the water depth and knowledge of
the sediment geoacoustic properties. Any sound below this frequency will not propagate far due
to energy losses through multiple reflections. The cut-off frequency as a function of water depth
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 9|Page
www.rpsgroup.com
is shown in Figure 3.1 for a range of seabed types. Thus, for a water depth of 10 m (i.e. shallow
waters typical of coastal areas and estuaries) the cut-off frequency would be approximately 70 Hz
for sand, 100 Hz for silt, 140 Hz for clayey silt and 40 Hz for bedrock.
Figure 3.1: Lower cut-off frequency as a function of depth for a range of seabed types.
3.8 Sound energy can also be absorbed due to interactions at the molecular level converting the
acoustic energy into heat. This is another frequency dependent effect with higher frequencies
experiencing much higher losses than lower frequencies. This is shown in Figure 3.2. Although
the effect of this absorption will be higher in cold water and with higher levels of MgSO 4, these
variations are relatively insignificant.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 10 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
Figure 3.2: Absorption loss coefficient (α), dB/km (pH 8, 5 ºC, salinity 35 ppt).
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 11 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
4 Assessment Criteria
Effects of sound on Marine Mammals

4.1 Assessment criteria have been developed based on a review of available evidence including
national and international guidance and scientific literature. The following sections summarise
the relevant criteria and describe the evidence base used to derive them.
4.2 Underwater noise has the potential to affect marine life in different ways depending on its noise
level and characteristics. Assessment criteria generally separate sound into two distinct types,
as follows:
• Impulsive sounds which are typically transient, brief (less than one second), broadband,
and consist of high peak sound pressure with rapid rise time and rapid decay (ANSI 1986;
NIOSH 1998; ANSI 2005). This category includes sound sources such as seismic surveys,
impact piling and underwater explosions; and
• Non-impulsive (continuous) sounds which can be broadband, narrowband or tonal, brief

or prolonged, continuous or intermittent and typically do not have a high peak sound pressure
with rapid rise/decay time that impulsive sounds do (ANSI 1995; NIOSH 1998). This
category includes sound sources such as continuous vibro-piling, running machinery, sonar
and vessels.
4.3 The acoustic assessment criteria for marine mammals in this report has followed the latest
International guidance, (based on the best available scientific information), that are widely
accepted for assessments in the UK, Europe and worldwide.
4.4 The zone of injury in this study is classified as the distance over which a marine mammal can
suffer a Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS) leading to non-reversible auditory injury. Injury
thresholds are based on a dual criteria approach using both linear (i.e. un-weighted) peak SPL
and marine mammal hearing-weighted SELs, as set out in Southall et al. (2019). The hearing
weighting function is designed to represent the bandwidth for each group within which acoustic
exposures can have auditory effects. The categories are summarised in Table 4.3.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 12 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
Table 4.1: Marine mammal hearing groups (Southall et al., 2019)
Marine mammal hearing Auditory weighting Genera (or species) included

group function
Low-frequency cetaceans LF Balaenidae (Balaena, Eubalaenidae spp.); Balaenopteridae
(Balaenoptera physalus, B. musculus)
Balaenopteridae (Balaenoptera acutorostrata, B.
bonaerensis, B. borealis, B. edeni, B. omurai; Megaptera
novaeangliae); Neobalenidae (Caperea); Eschrichtiidae
(Eschrichtius)
High-frequency cetaceans HF Physeteridae (Physeter); Ziphiidae (Berardius spp.,
Hyperoodon spp., Indopacetus, Mesoplodon spp.,
Tasmacetus, Ziphius); Delphinidae (Orcinus)
Delphinidae (Delphinus, Feresa, Globicephala spp.,
Grampus, Lagenodelphis, Lagenorhynchus acutus, L.
albirostris, L. obliquidens, L. obscurus, Lissodelphis spp.,
Orcaella spp., Peponocephala, Pseudorca, Sotalia spp.,
Sousa spp., Stenella spp., Steno, Tursiops spp.);
Montodontidae (Delphinapterus, Monodon); Plantanistidae
(Plantanista)
Very high-frequency VHF Delphinidae (Cephalorhynchus spp.; Lagenorhynchus
cetaceans cruciger, L. austrailis); Phocoenidae (Neophocaena spp.,
Phocoena spp., Phocoenoides); Iniidae (Inia); Kogiidae
(Kogia); Lipotidae (Lipotes); Pontoporiidae (Pontoporia)
Sirenians SI Trichechidae (Trichechus spp.); Dugongidae (Dugong)
Phocid carnivores in water PCW Phocidae (Cystophora, Erignathus, Halichoerus,
Histriophoca, Hydrurga, Leptonychotes, Lobodon, Mirounga
spp., Monachus, Neomonachus, Ommatophoca,
Pagophilus, Phoca spp., Pusa spp.)
Other marine carnivores in OCW Odobenidae (Odobenus); Otariidae (Arctocephalus spp.,
water Callorhinus, Eumetopias, Neophoca, Otaria, Phocarctos,
Zalophus spp.); Ursidae (Ursus maritimus); Mustelidae
(Enhydra, Lontra feline)
4.5 The marine mammal injury criteria published in March 2019 (Southall et al. 2019) utilise the same
hearing weighting curves and thresholds as presented in NMFS (2018) with the main difference
being the naming of the hearing groups and introduction of additional thresholds for animals not
covered by NMFS (2018). A comparison between the two naming conventions is shown in Table
4.2. For avoidance of doubt, the naming convention used in this report is based upon those set
out in Southall et al. (2019). Consequently, this review utilises criteria which are applicable to both
NMFS (2018) and Southall et al. (2019).
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 13 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
Table 4.2: Comparison of hearing group names between NMFS 2018 and Southall 2019
NMFS (2018) hearing group name Southall et al. (2019) hearing group name
Low frequency cetaceans (LF) Low-frequency cetaceans (LF)
Mid frequency cetaceans (MF) High-frequency cetaceans (HF)
High frequency cetaceans (HF) Very high-frequency cetaceans (VHF)
Otariid Pinnipeds in water (OW) Other marine carnivores in water (OCW)
Phocid pinnipeds in water (PW) Phocid carnivores in water (PCW)
4.6 The weightings functions used in this study and are shown in Figure 4.1. It should be noted that
not all of the categories of marine mammal will be present in the study area but criteria are
presented in this report for completeness.
Figure 4.1: Hearing weighting functions (Southall et al., 2019).
4.7 The relevant criteria proposed by NOAA (NMFS, 2018) are as summarised in Table 4.3 for
impulsive sound (e.g. impact piling) and non-impulsive sound (e.g. vibro-piling, pile drilling and
vessels). The SEL criteria are marine mammal hearing weighted whereas the peak criteria are
unweighted.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 14 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
Table 4.3: Summary of PTS onset acoustic thresholds (Southall et al., 2019).
Hearing Group Parameter Impulsive Non-impulsive

PTS TTS PTS TTS
Low-frequency (LF) Peak, dB re 1 µPa (unweighted) 219 213 - -
cetaceans SEL, dB re 1 µPa2s (LF weighted) 183 168 199 179
High-frequency (HF) Peak, dB re 1 µPa (unweighted) 230 224 - -
cetaceans SEL, dB re 1 µPa2s (HF weighted) 185 170 198 178
Very High-frequency (VHF) Peak, dB re 1 µPa (unweighted) 202 196 - -
cetaceans SEL, dB re 1 µPa2s (VHF weighted) 155 140 173 153
Phocid carnivores in water Peak, dB re 1 µPa (unweighted) 218 212 - -
(PCW) SEL, dB re 1 µPa2s (PCW weighted) 185 170 201 181
Other marine carnivores in Peak, dB re 1 µPa (unweighted) 232 226 - -
water (OCW) SEL, dB re 1 µPa2s (OCW weighted) 203 188 219 199
4.8 Under current legislation in Ireland, it is an offence to disturb or injure a marine mammal whether
this occurs via introduced sound or another anthropogenic source. The induction of temporary or
permanent tissue damage and a Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS) in hearing sensitivity, which
can have negative effects on the ability to use natural sounds (e.g., to communicate, navigate,
locate prey) for a period of minutes, hours or days may constitute such an injury. It is therefore
considered that anthropogenic sound sources with the potential to induce TTS in a receiving
marine mammal contain the potential for both disturbance and injury to the animal.
4.9 UK Industry guidelines on the prevention of injury to marine mammals recommend that only PTS
is considered to result in injury for which appropriate mitigation should be followed (JNCC, 2010).
The equivalent guidance in Ireland on managing the risk to marine mammals from subsea noise,
suggests that risks to protected species should also be assessed with respect to the potential for
TTS to occur (DEHLG, 2014). The NMFS (2018) and Southall et al. (2019) guidelines define TTS
as a 6 dB shift in the hearing threshold. Although animals are able to recover fully from TTS,
particularly as they move away from a source, hearing loss may become permanent if TTS occurs
over a sustained period of time, and if hearing does not return to pre-impact levels. Thus, the
distinction between TTS and PTS depends on whether there is complete recovery of the
individual’s hearing.
4.10 This review considers the potential for a permanent injury to occur by modelling sound exposures
that could lead to PTS. This is captured in the threshold for PTS for the marine mammal hearing-
weighted cumulative SELs (as described above) which assume that a marine mammal exposed
to noise levels over a prolonged period could experience permanent hearing loss. In addition,
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 15 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
peak injury thresholds are used to determine potential ranges for instantaneous injury. Thus, as
per the DEHLG (2014) guidance, this review considers whether there is the potential for injury to
occur.
4.11 For completeness, and in line with the DEHLG (2014), this review also considers the range at
which the onset of TTS could occur (leading to a reversible hearing loss) using the most recent
thresholds (Southall et al., 2019). The most likely response of a marine mammal to noise levels
that could induce TTS is to flee from the ensonified area (Southall et al., 2007) and subsequently
the onset of TTS can be referred to as the fleeing response. This is therefore a behavioural
response that overlaps with disturbance ranges and animals exposed to these noise levels are
likely to actively avoid hearing damage by moving away from the area.
4.12 This review adopts a conservative approach and uses the NMFS (2005) Level B harassment
threshold of 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for impulsive sound. Level B Harassment is defined as having
the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioural patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing,
breeding, feeding, or sheltering but which does not have the potential to injure a marine mammal
or marine mammal stock in the wild.
4.13 The High Energy Seismic Survey workshop on the effects of seismic (i.e. pulsed) sound on marine
mammals (HESS, 1997) concluded that mild behavioural disturbance would most likely occur at
rms sound levels greater than 140 dB re 1 μPa (rms). This workshop drew on studies by
Richardson (1995) but recognised that there was some degree of variability in reactions between
different studies and mammal groups. Consequently, for the purposes of this review, a
precautionary level of 140 dB re 1 μPa (rms) is used to indicate the onset of low level marine
mammal disturbance effects for all mammal groups for impulsive sound.
4.14 NMFS (2005) guidance sets the marine mammal level B harassment threshold for continuous
noise at 120 dB re 1 μPa (rms). This value sits approximately mid-way between the range of
values identified in Southall et al. (2007) for continuous sound but is lower than the value at which
the majority of mammals responded at a response score of 6 (i.e. once the received rms sound
pressure level is greater than 140 dB re 1 μPa). Taking into account the paucity and high-level
variation of data relating to onset of behavioural effects due to continuous sound, it is
recommended that any ranges predicted using this number are viewed as probabilistic and
potentially over-precautionary.
4.15 It is important to understand that exposure to sound levels in excess of the behavioural change
threshold stated above does not necessarily imply that the sound will result in significant
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 16 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
disturbance. As noted previously, it is also necessary to assess the likelihood that the sensitive
receptors will be exposed to that sound and whether the numbers exposed are likely to be
significant at the population level.
Effects of Sound on Fish

4.16 The thresholds for harm to fish and sea turtle species have been based on the sound exposure
guidelines for fish proposed by the ANSI-Accredited Standards Committee S3/SC 1, Animal
Bioacoustics Working Group (Popper et al. 2014). The guidelines represent the Working Group’s
consensus efforts to establish broadly applicable guidelines for fish and sea turtles, with specific
criteria relating to mortality and potential mortal injury, recoverable injury and TTS. The Working
Group defines the criteria for injury and TTS as follows:
• mortality and mortal injury – immediate or delayed death
• recoverable injury – injuries, including hair cell damage, minor internal or external
hematoma, etc. None of these injuries is likely to result in mortality
• TTS – short or long-term changes in hearing sensitivity that may or may not reduce fitness
(defined as any persistent change in hearing of 6 dB or greater).
4.17 The ASA criteria for exposure of fish and sea turtle to seismic airguns are summarised in Table
4.4.
Table 4.4: Summary of Fish and Sea Turtle Injury Exposure Criteria for Seismic
Airguns
Type of animal Parameter Mortality and Recoverable TTS Behaviour

potential injury
mortal injury
Fish: no swim SEL, dB re 1 μPa2s - - 186 (Near) High
bladder (particle (Intermediate) Moderate
Peak, dB re 1 μPa 213 213 -
motion detection) (Far) Low
Fish: swim bladder is SEL, dB re 1 μPa2s - - 186 (Near) High
not involved in (Intermediate) Moderate
hearing (particle Peak, dB re 1 μPa 207 207 -
(Far) Low
motion detection)
Fish: swim bladder SEL, dB re 1 μPa2s - - 186 (Near) High
involved in hearing Peak, dB re 1 μPa 207 207 - (Intermediate) High
(primarily pressure (Far) Moderate
detection)
Sea turtles Peak, dB re 1 μPa >207 (Near) High (Near) High
(Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Moderate
(Far) Low (Far) Low
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 17 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
Fish: eggs and Peak, dB re 1 μPa 207 - - (Near) Moderate

larvae (Intermediate) Low
(Far) Low
Notes:
Range of effect classified as Near = tens of meters / Intermediate= hundreds of meters / Far = thousands of meters
Relative risk classified as high, moderate or low
4.18 Criteria for assessing the effects on fish and sea turtle due to sonar based sources are
summarised in Table 4.5, based on Popper et al., 2014. These criteria apply to sources with a
frequency range up to approximately 10 kHz (i.e. mid-frequency sonar). The ASA guidelines note
that high frequency sonar (i.e. source frequencies >10 kHz) are unlikely to injure fish and sea
turtle and therefore does not present criteria for these.
Table 4.5: Summary of Fish Injury Exposure Criteria for Sonar
Animal Parameter Mortality and Recoverable TTS Behaviour

potential mortal injury
injury
Fish: no swim - (Near) Low (Near) Low N/A N/A
bladder (particle (Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Low
motion detection) (Far) Low (Far) Low
Fish: swim bladder is RMS, dB re 1 µPa >210 >210 N/A N/A
not involved in
hearing (particle
motion detection)
Fish: swim bladder RMS, dB re 1 µPa >210 >210 >210 >209
involved in hearing
(primarily pressure
detection)
Fish: eggs and - N/A N/A N/A N/A
larvae
Notes:
4.19 Criteria for assessing the effects on fish and sea turtle due to non-impulsive, continuous sources
(e.g. vessel noise) are summarised in Table 4.6.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 18 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
Table 4.6: Criteria for injury in fish and sea turtles due to non-impulsive sound.
Type of animal Mortality and Recoverable injury TTS Behaviour

potential mortal
injury
Fish: no swim (Near) Low (Near) Low (Near) Moderate (Near) Moderate
bladder (particle (Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Moderate
motion detection) (Far) Low (Far) Low (Far) Low (Far) Low
Fish: where swim (Near) Low (Near) Low (Near) Moderate
bladder is not (Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Low (Near) Moderate
involved in hearing (Far) Low (Far) Low (Far) Low (Intermediate) Moderate
(particle motion (Far) Low
detection)
Fish: where swim (Near) Low 170 dB re 1 μPa (rms) 158 dB re 1 μPa (Near) High
bladder is involved in (Intermediate) Low for 48 hours (rms) for 12 hours
(Intermediate) Moderate
hearing (primarily (Far) Low
pressure detection) (Far) Low
Sea turtles (Near) Low (Near) Moderate (Near) High

(Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Moderate
(Far) Low (Far) Low (Far) Low
Eggs and larvae (Near) Low (Near) Low (Near) Low (Near) Moderate
(Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Low (Intermediate) Moderate
(Far) Low (Far) Low (Far) Low (Far) Low
Notes:
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 19 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
5 Review of Survey Sound Sources
Geophysical Surveys
Multibeam Echosounder Surveys
5.1 Multibeam echosounder (MBES) surveys collect detailed topographical data of the seabed.
MBES use acoustic technology to provide detailed bathymetric mapping of the seabed. The
MBES is typically hull or pole mounted on the survey vessel or ROV and is used in conjunction
with a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) aided inertial positioning and orientation
system, specifically designed for geo-referencing and motion compensation in hydrographic
surveying.
5.2 The exact equipment used will be confirmed following the appointment of a survey contractor.
However, the Kongsberg EM710, EM712 or EM2040 may be taken as an indicative example of a
MBES system likely to be used. Typical survey source levels are summarised in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1: Typical MBES source levels
Description Frequency, Source level, dB re Pulse Pulse Beam

kHz 1 μPa re 1 m (rms) rate, s-1 width, ms width
MBES Kongsberg EM712 100 208 10 0.2 2˚
MBES Kongsberg EM2040 200 - 700 209 50 0.324 2˚
5.3 It is possible that PTS and TTS could occur to low, high and very-high frequency cetaceans as
well as pinnipeds within tens of metres (<50 m) of the MBES survey. PTS is unlikely to occur for
the OCW hearing group (i.e. otters) although it is possible that TTS could occur within a few (<10)
meters of the survey.
5.4 Behavioural disturbance to marine mammals could occur at ranges of 150 – 200 m from the
survey.
5.5 It is unlikely that fish and sea turtle will be injured as a result of the survey due to the high
frequency source (see paragraph 4.18).
5.6 The implications of these ranges on the favourable conservation status and conservation
objectives of marine mammal, fish and otters qualifying interests of relevant European sites are
considered in the Natura Impact Statement (NIS).
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 20 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
Side scan sonar surveys

5.7 Side scan sonar surveys are used to determine sediment characteristics and seabed features.
These surveys use acoustic technology to image the surface of the seabed for the detection of
objects or structures. The side scan sonar is typically towed astern of the survey vessel and used
in conjunction with high accuracy Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) positioning. To
obtain those images, it digitises a sound pulse sent out from two transducers mounted on each
side of the side scan sonar towfish. Images are based on the amount of reflected sound energy
and presented on a time basis resulting in a continuous, highly detailed image of the bottom.
Seabed sediment classification can also be interpreted from the side scan sonar data according
to the intensity of the acoustic return.
5.8 The exact equipment used will be confirmed following the appointment of a survey contractor.
However, the EdgeTech 4200-MP may be taken as an indicative example of a side scan sonar
likely to be used.
Table 5.2: Typical sidescan sonar source levels
Description Frequency, Source level, dB re Pulse Pulse Beam

kHz 1 μPa re 1 m (rms) rate, s-1 width, ms width
Sidescan sonar Edgetech 4200 100 - 900 210 30 15 1˚
5.9 It is possible that PTS and TTS could occur to low and high frequency cetaceans and pinnipeds
within tens of metres of the sidescan survey. For very high frequency cetaceans PTS could also
occur within tens of metres (<50 m) although TTS could occur at distances of up to approximately
100 m. PTS is unlikely to occur for the OCW hearing group (i.e. otters) although it is possible that
TTS could occur within tens of meters of the survey.
5.10 Behavioural disturbance to marine mammals could occur at ranges of 150 – 200 m from the
survey.
5.11 It is unlikely that fish and sea turtle will be injured as a result of the survey due to the high
frequency source (see paragraph 4.18).
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 21 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
Sub-bottom profiler surveys

5.13 Shallow sub-bottom profiling (SBP) surveying aims to create a 2-D or 3-D image of the subsurface
up to potential depths of approximately 50 m below seabed, depending on the geological
conditions encountered and the choice of system used. Different types of SBP are available
including chirp, pinger, boomer, sparker, parametric chirp systems and seismic sleeve guns. The
most appropriate system will be decided depending on the seabed, anticipated geological
environment and the objectives of the survey.
5.14 Table 5.3 provides a summary of source levels and acoustic parameters for indicative examples
of the types of sonar based survey equipment which could be employed. This equipment is
classed as non-impulsive in nature and therefore the marine mammal injury thresholds for non-
impulsive noise are applicable to assess likelihood of PTS and TTS injury.
Table 5.3: Typical non-impulsive (sonar-based) SBP survey source levels
Survey type Example Unit Frequency, Source level, Pulse Pulse Beam
kHz dB re 1 μPa rate, s-1 width, ms width
re 1 m (rms)
Chirp GeoAcoustics 5430A 100 210 30 15 1˚
Chirp Edgetech 3300 2 - 16 200 Unknown 40 40˚
Pinger Kongsberg GeoPulse 4 214 4 50 30˚
Parametric Innomar SES-2000 85 - 115 235 15 1 2.5˚
Echosounder Quattro
5.15 Based on the source levels and previous assessments of sonar based surveys, it is considered
likely that any of the marine mammal PTS and TTS injury thresholds could be exceeded within
tens of metres of the sources for low and high-frequency cetaceans and pinnipeds. PTS could
occur for very high frequency cetaceans within tens of metres and TTS could occur within
approximately 100 m. It is unlikely that any injury thresholds would be exceeded for the OCW
hearing group (i.e. otters).
5.16 Behavioural disturbance to marine mammals could occur within up to 200 m of the surveys.
5.17 It is unlikely that fish and sea turtle will be injured as a result of the surveys using high frequency
sources but it is possible that injury could occur for mid frequency sources (e.g. pinger), although
this is likely to be limited to within a few metres depending on the source strength used.
5.18 Table 5.4 provides a summary of source levels and acoustic parameters for typical impulsive sub
bottom survey equipment. This equipment is classed as impulsive in nature and therefore the
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 22 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
marine mammal injury thresholds for impulsive noise are applicable to assess likelihood of PTS
and TTS injury.
Table 5.4: Typical impulsive SBP survey source levels
Source Equipment Source level, Source SEL, Source level, T90, ms

dB re 1 μPa dB re 1 μPa2s dB re 1 μPa
re 1 m (peak) re 1 m re 1 m (rms)
Boomer Geo-Boomer 300 – 500 214 174 208 0.4
Boomer Applied Acoustics A251 Unknown 175 212 0.18
Sparker Geosource 200-400 219 182 214 0.7
Sleeve Gun TI sleeve gun 10CU 224 - 226 195 214 13.5
5.19 For the boomer and sparker PTS is unlikely to occur to low or high frequency cetaceans or
pinnipeds. TTS could occur for low-frequency cetaceans within tens of metres of the source but
is unlikely for high-frequency cetaceans. For very high frequency cetaceans, TTS could occur
within a few metres and PTS could occur within tens of metres. It is unlikely that any injury
thresholds would be exceeded for the OCW hearing group (i.e. otters). Behavioural disturbance
is possible with a range of up to approximately 200 m.
5.20 For the sleeve gun, it is unlikely that PTS and TTS will occur for high frequency cetaceans. For
low frequency cetaceans and pinnipeds, PTS injury could occur with a few metres of the source
and TTS could occur within approximately 100 m. For very high frequency cetaceans PTS could
occur within 100 – 200 m of the source and TTS could occur within 1 to 2 km of the source. It is
unlikely that any injury thresholds would be exceeded for the OCW hearing group (i.e. otters).
Behavioural disturbance is possible with a range of up to approximately 2 km.
5.21 It is possible that some fish and sea turtle could be injured within a few meters of the impulsive
SBP survey sources.
Magnetometer surveys
5.23 Magnetometer surveys may be used to identify magnetic anomalies and confirm interpretation of
the side scan sonar surveys and hazard mapping for metal obstructions, shipwrecks and
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 23 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
unexploded ordnance on the surface and in the sub-surface. Magnetometer surveys are not
considered to be a significant noise source and have therefore not been included in this review.
Geotechnical Surveys
Borehole Drilling
5.24 Boreholes will be drilled at up to 30 locations in subtidal areas of the Foreshore Licence
Application Area. Investigation techniques may comprise a combination of API open hole rotary,
cored rotary or both depending on the encountered sub-seabed conditions.
5.25 The primary noise source for these activities is expected to be the drill rig which is likely to be a
jack-up rig.
5.26 Typical noise emissions from the a jack-up rig typical of that which may be used in the project are
shown in Table 5.5, based on a review of publicly available data.
Table 5.5: Borehole Drilling Rig Source Levels used in the Assessment
Description Data source Source sound pressure level at 1 m

RMS dB re 1 μPa Peak, dB re 1 SEL(24h), dB re
μPa 1 μPa2s
Jack-up rig anchored in Nedwell and Edwards 162 165 211
position (no DP) (2004)
5.27 In the table, a correction of +3 dB has been applied to the RMS sound pressure level to estimate
the likely peak sound pressure level. SEL have been estimated for each source based on 24
hours continuous operation, although it is important to note that it is highly unlikely that any marine
mammal, fish or sea turtle would stay at a stationary location or within a fixed radius of a vessel
(or any other noise source) for 24 hours.
5.28 Based on the above information and previous assessments for similar sources, it is concluded
that it is unlikely that any of the injury thresholds (PTS or TTS) would be reached for any of the
marine mammal groups due to drilling activities. It is possible that disturbance could occur within
300 – 400 m of the borehole sampling vessel.
5.29 It is unlikely that fish and sea turtle will be injured as a result of underwater noise during borehole
drilling.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 24 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
considered in the NIS.
Cone Penetration Test

5.31 Cone penetration tests (CPTs) will be undertaken at up to 30 representative locations in the
subtidal areas of the Foreshore Licence Application Area. The CPTs will be performed from a
standard survey vessel holding station at each sampling location, rather than a jack up drilling rig.
As the CPT sampling equipment does not emit noise into the environment, it is expected that the
noise levels for this activity and injury and disturbance ranges will be lower or similar to borehole
drilling. Consequently, it is concluded that it is unlikely that any of the injury thresholds (PTS or
TTS) would be reached for any of the marine mammal groups due to drilling activities. It is possible
that disturbance could occur within close proximity to the survey vessel.
5.32 It is unlikely that fish and sea turtle will be injured or disturbed as a result of CPT sampling
operations.
Vibrocore
5.34 Vibrocore samples will be undertaken in up to 30 representative locations in the subtidal area of
the Foreshore Licence Application Area. Indicative equipment to be used is a modular vibrocorer
or similar.
5.35 Measurements of a vibrocore test (Reiser et al., 2011) show underwater source sound pressure
levels of approximately 187 dB re 1 µPa re 1 m (RMS). Derived source sound levels are set out
in Table 5.6.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 25 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
Table 5.6: Vibrocore Source Levels
Description Data source Source sound pressure level at 1 m

RMS dB re 1 μPa Peak, dB re 1 SEL(1h), dB re
μPa 1 μPa2s
Vibrocoring (SEL based Reiser et al. (2011) 187 190 223
on 1 hour operation for
single core sample)
5.36 Based on the source levels and previous assessments of vibrocoring, it is considered unlikely that
any of the marine mammal PTS injury thresholds would be exceeded. However, TTS could occur
within a few metres (< 10 m) for low-frequency and high-frequency cetaceans and pinnipeds and
within a few hundred metres for very high-frequency cetaceans. It is unlikely that any injury
thresholds would be exceeded for the OCW hearing group (i.e. otters).
5.37 Behavioural disturbance to marine mammals could occur within a few kilometres of vibrocoring
activity.
5.38 It is unlikely that fish and sea turtle will be injured as a result of underwater noise during
vibrocoring.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 26 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
References
ANSI. 1986. “S12.7-1986 Method for Measurement of Impulse Noise.”

ANSI. 1995. “ANSI S3.20-1995 Bioacoustical Terminology.” American National Standards Institute.
ANSI. 2005. “ANSI S1.13-2005 Measurement of Sound Pressure Levels in Air.” American National
Standards Institute.
Brekhovskikh, Leonid Maksimovich, and IUriĭ Lysanov. 2003. Fundamentals of Ocean Acoustics.
Cole, B. F. 1965. “Marine Sediment Attenuation and Ocean-Bottom-Reflected Sound.” The Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America 38 (2): 291–297.
Eckart, Carl. 1953. “The Scattering of Sound from the Sea Surface.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society
of America 25 (3): 566–570.
Essen, H.-H. 1994. “Scattering from a Rough Sedimental Seafloor Containing Shear and Layering.” The
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 95 (3): 1299–1310.
Etter, Paul C. 2013. Underwater Acoustic Modeling and Simulation. CRC Press.
Fortuin, Leonard. 1970. “Survey of Literature on Reflection and Scattering of Sound Waves at the Sea
Surface.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 47 (5B): 1209–1228.
Greaves, Robert J., and Ralph A. Stephen. 2003. “The Influence of Large-Scale Seafloor Slope and
Average Bottom Sound Speed on Low-Grazing-Angle Monostatic Acoustic Scattering.” The Journal of the
Hamilton, Edwin L. 1970. “Reflection Coefficients and Bottom Losses at Normal Incidence Computed
from Pacific Sediment Properties.” Geophysics 35 (6): 995–1004.
HESS. 1997. “Summary of Recommendations Made by the Expert Panel at the HESS Workshop on the
Effects of Seismic Sound on Marine Mammals.”. In . Pepperdine University, Malibu, California.
JNCC 2019. “Guidelines for Minimising the Risk of Injury and Disturbance to Marine Mammals from
Seismic Surveys”.
Kinsler, Lawrence E., Austin R. Frey, Alan B. Coppens, and James V. Sanders. 1999. “Fundamentals of
Acoustics.” Fundamentals of Acoustics, 4th Edition, by Lawrence E. Kinsler, Austin R. Frey, Alan B.
Coppens, James V. Sanders, Pp. 560. ISBN 0-471-84789-5. Wiley-VCH, December 1999. 1.
Kuo, Edward YT. 1992. “Acoustic Wave Scattering from Two Solid Boundaries at the Ocean Bottom:
Reflection Loss.” Oceanic Engineering, IEEE Journal Of 17 (1): 159–170.
Lurton, Xavier. 2002. An Introduction to Underwater Acoustics: Principles and Applications. Springer
Science & Business Media.
Mackenzie, K. V. 1960. “Reflection of Sound from Coastal Bottoms.” The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America 32 (2): 221–231.
Marsh, H. Wysor, M. Schulkin, and S. G. Kneale. 1961. “Scattering of Underwater Sound by the Sea
Surface.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 33 (3): 334–340.
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 27 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com
McKinney, C. Mo, and C. D. Anderson. 1964. “Measurements of Backscattering of Sound from the Ocean
Bottom.” The Journal of The Acoustical Society of America 36 (1): 158–163.
NIOSH. 1998. “Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure.” National Institute
for Occupational Safety and Health.
NMFS. 2005. “Scoping Report for NMFS EIS for the National Acoustic Guidelines on Marine Mammals.”
National Marine Fisheries Service.
NMFS. 2018. “2018 Revision to: Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound
on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0).” NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR-59. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
NOAA. 2016. “Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal
Hearing: Underwater Acoustic Thresholds for Onset of Permanent and Temporary Threshold Shifts.”
National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA).
DEHLG. 2014. “Guidance to Manage the Risk to Marine Mammals from Manmade Sound Sources in Irish
Waters”. Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht.
Popper, Arthur N., Anthony D. Hawkins, Richard R. Fay, David A. Mann, Soraya Bartol, Thomas J.
Carlson, Sheryl Coombs, et al. 2014. ASA S3/SC1.4 TR-2014 Sound Exposure Guidelines for Fishes and
Sea Turtles: A Technical Report Prepared by ANSI-Accredited Standards Committee S3/SC1 and
Registered with ANSI. Springer.
Richardson, William John. 1995. Marine Mammals and Noise. Academic Press.
Southall, Brandon L., Ann E. Bowles, William T. Ellison, James J. Finneran, Roger L. Gentry, Charles R.
Greene Jr, David Kastak, et al. 2007. “Marine Mammal Noise-Exposure Criteria: Initial Scientific
Recommendations.” Aquatic Mammals 33 (4): 411–521.
Southall, Brandon L., James J. Finneran, Colleen Reichmuth, Paul E. Nachtigall, Darlene R. Ketten, Ann
E. Bowles, William T. Ellison, Douglas P. Nowacek, and Peter L. Tyack. 2019. “Marine Mammal Noise
Exposure Criteria: Updated Scientific Recommendations for Residual Hearing Effects.” Aquatic Mammals
45 (2): 125–232.
Urick, Robert J. 1983. Principles of Underwater Sound. McGraw-HiII.
Urick, Robert J., and Robert M. Hoover. 1956. “Backscattering of Sound from the Sea Surface: Its
Measurement, Causes, and Application to the Prediction of Reverberation Levels.” The Journal of the
JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 28 | P a g e
www.rpsgroup.com

Underwater Noise Review: For Saoirse Wave Energy Limited

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Underwater Noise Review: For Saoirse Wave Energy Limited

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Underwater Noise Review

For Saoirse Wave Energy Limited

Prepared by CEng, BSc (Hons), Technical Director 14/11/2022

Tables, Figures and Appendices

JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 4|Page

2 Acoustic Concepts and Terminology

JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 5|Page

Figure 2.1: Graphical representation of acoustic wave descriptors

2.3 The rms sound pressure level (SPL) is defined as follows:

JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 6|Page

JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 7|Page

3 Review of Sound Propagation Concepts

JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 8|Page

JA2339–REPT–01–R0 | 14/11/2022 9|Page

Effects of sound on Marine Mammals

• Non-impulsive (continuous) sounds which can be broadband, narrowband or tonal, brief

Table 4.1: Marine mammal hearing groups (Southall et al., 2019)

Marine mammal hearing Auditory weighting Genera (or species) included

Figure 4.1: Hearing weighting functions (Southall et al., 2019).

Hearing Group Parameter Impulsive Non-impulsive

Effects of Sound on Fish

• mortality and mortal injury – immediate or delayed death

Type of animal Parameter Mortality and Recoverable TTS Behaviour

Fish: eggs and Peak, dB re 1 μPa 207 - - (Near) Moderate

Table 4.5: Summary of Fish Injury Exposure Criteria for Sonar

Animal Parameter Mortality and Recoverable TTS Behaviour

Type of animal Mortality and Recoverable injury TTS Behaviour

Sea turtles (Near) Low (Near) Moderate (Near) High

5 Review of Survey Sound Sources

Table 5.1: Typical MBES source levels

Description Frequency, Source level, dB re Pulse Pulse Beam

Side scan sonar surveys

Table 5.2: Typical sidescan sonar source levels

Description Frequency, Source level, dB re Pulse Pulse Beam

Sub-bottom profiler surveys

Table 5.3: Typical non-impulsive (sonar-based) SBP survey source levels

Table 5.4: Typical impulsive SBP survey source levels

Source Equipment Source level, Source SEL, Source level, T90, ms

Description Data source Source sound pressure level at 1 m

Cone Penetration Test

Table 5.6: Vibrocore Source Levels

Description Data source Source sound pressure level at 1 m

ANSI. 1986. “S12.7-1986 Method for Measurement of Impulse Noise.”

You might also like