Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Input of Energy/Underwater Sound

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook on Marine Environment Protection

Abstract

Underwater sound is ubiquitous throughout the world’s oceans. Evaluating its impact and relevance for the marine fauna is highly complex and hampered by a paucity of data, lack of understanding and ambiguity of terms. When comparing sound (an energetic pollutant) with substantial pollutants (chemical, biological or marine litter) two notable differences emerge: Firstly, while sound propagates instantaneously away from the source, it also ceases immediately within minutes of shutting off the source. Anthropogenic noise is hence per-se ephemeral, lending itself to a set of in-situ mitigation strategies unsuitable for mitigation of persistent pollutants. Secondly, while pollution with hazardous substances can readily be described quantitatively with few parameters (concentration as the most important one), the description of sound and its impact on aquatic life is of much higher complexity, as to be evidenced by the issue’s multifaceted description following hereinafter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    “Sound”, as defined by ISO/DIS 18405.2 constitutes the “alteration in pressure, stress or material displacement propagated via the action of elastic stresses in an elastic medium and that involves local compression and expansion of the medium, or the superposition of such propagated alterations.” The scientific meaning of sound therefore has no judgmental connotation, i.e. it is not used as the antonym of “noise”, regardless of its origin or deliberateness of emission. Hereinafter, use of the term sound is strictly confined its physical meaning.

  2. 2.

    The “acoustic environment”</Emphasis> represents the sound at the receiver from all sound sources as modified by the environment (ISO 2014. ISO 12913-1:2014(E) Acoustics—Soundscape—Part1: Definitions and conceptual framework.) In marine acoustics it is currently used synonymously with the term “soundscape”, which, however, in terrestrial acoustics represents a subjective perception, i.e. the acoustic environment as perceived by the listener.

  3. 3.

    Sometimes called “ambient noise”, a term we deprecate, due to the ambivalent meanings of the term noise. See also footnote #7.

  4. 4.

    “Nominal source levels” are used as parameter in far-field sound level calculations and must not be confused with true sound levels near the source. Note that Figure 1 depicts spectral source levels, not source levels, for discrete sources and spectral levels for diffuse sources.

  5. 5.

    The terms, high-, mid- and low-frequency are associated by different stakeholders with rather different frequency ranges. Whenever using these terms, their definition should be provided for clarification. Here we follow the classification used by Hildebrand (2009) anthropogenic and natural sources of ambient noise in the ocean. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 395, 5–20.

  6. 6.

    However, overly ambitious efforts to provide precise sound level for risk assessments are often futile, as error estimates of even simple sound propagation estimates are dwarfed by the order of magnitude(s) bigger uncertainties associated with the estimation of probability and severity of contingent risks to the marine fauna.

  7. 7.

    Alternatively, the term “noise” might also bear the connotation of being disturbing, however this is a rather subjective perception: Signals generated by marine animals may be experienced as distraction by a submarine’s sonar operator, while the sonar pings of a submarine might disrupt the underwater communication of marine mammals. Additionally, noise sometimes is understood as all sounds of anthropogenic origin or it can bear special meanings in the context of measurement techniques.

  8. 8.

    Note that the terms “low” and “mid” frequency are used differently by different navies, creating ambiguities. Discussion should specify the frequency range in Hertz.

  9. 9.

    “Naval” in English implies “belonging to the Navy”, i.e. a military context, whereas the French “naval” implies “nautical”, i.e. all seagoing activities including civil. The German text version simply refers to highly powerful (or efficient, the German term is ambivalent in this regard) active underwater sonars, including e.g. fishing sonars.

  10. 10.

    With recovering whale stocks, acoustic levels are expected to rise in their respective vocalization bands. For Antarctic Blue Whales, which already produce the most powerful signal in the Southern Ocean at 27 Hz when estimated at only about 1–2% of their pre-whaling population, acoustic levels might rise by up to 20 dB should the population fully recover. Estimates of natural levels should hence be based on the pre-whaling (status quo ante) acoustic state of the ocean.

References

  • Ainslie MA (2015) A century of sonar: planetary oceanography, underwater noise monitoring and the terminology of underwater sound. Acoustics Today 11:12–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrew RK, Howe BM, Mercer JA (2011) Long-time trends in ship traffic noise for four sites off the North American West Coast. J Acoust Soc Am 129:642–651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bombosch A, Zitterbart DP, Van Opzeeland I, Frickenhaus S, Burkhardt E, Wisz MS, Boebel O (2014) Predictive habitat modelling of humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae) and Antarctic minke (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) whales in the Southern Ocean as a planning tool for seismic surveys. Deep Sea Res Part 1 Oceanogr Res Pap 91:101–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brumm H, Slabbekoorn H (2005) Acoustic communication in noise, advances in the study of behavior. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 151–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd IL, Frisk G, Urban E, Tyack P, Ausubel J, Seeyave S, Cato D, Southall B, Weise M, Andrew R, Akamatsu T, Dekeling R, Erbe C, Farmer D, Gentry R, Gross T, Hawkins A, Li F, Metcalf K, Miller JH, Moretti D, Rodrigo C, Shinke T (2011) An International Quiet Ocean Experiment. Oceanography 24:174–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Cato DH, Noad MJ, Dunlop RA, McCauley RD, Gales NJ, Kent CPS, Kniest H, Paton D, Jenner KCS, Noad J, Maggi AL, Parnum IM, Duncan AJ (2013) A study of the behavioural response of whales to the noise of seismic air guns: design, methods and progress. Acoustics Australia 41:88–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers S, James RN (2005) Sonar termination as a cause of mass cetacean strandings in Geographe Bay, south-western Australia. In: Society AA (ed) Acoustics 2005. Acoustics in a changing environment, Busselton, pp 391–398

    Google Scholar 

  • Chekab MAF, Ghadimi P, Djeddi SR, Soroushan M (2013) Investigation of different methods of noise reduction for submerged marine propellers and their classification. Am J Mech Eng 1:34–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox TM, Ragen TJ, Read AJ, Vos E, Baird RW, Balcomb K, Barlow J, Caldwell J, Cranford T, Crum L, D’Amico A, D’Spain GL, Fernandez A, Finneran J, Gentry RL, Gerth W, Gulland F, Hildebrand J, Houser D, Hullar T, Jepson PD, Ketten DR, MacLeod CD, Miller P, Moore S, Mountain DC, Palka D, Ponganis P, Rommel S, Rowles T, Taylor B, Tyack P, Wartzok D, Gisiner R, Mead J, Benner L (2006) Understanding the impacts of anthropogenic sound on beaked whales. J Cetacean Res Manag 7:177–187

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Amico A, Gisiner RC, Ketten DR, Hammock JA, Johnson C, Tyack PL, Mead J (2009) Beaked Whale strandings and naval exercises. Aquat Mamm 35:452–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Robertis A, Handegard NO (2013) Fish avoidance of research vessels and the efficacy of noise-reduced vessels: a review. ICES J Mar Sci 70:34–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • E & P Sound & Marine Live Programme (2016) http://www.soundandmarinelife.org/research-categories/behavioural-reactions-and-biological-significant-effects/projects-related-to-the-population-consequences-of-acoustic-disturbance-pcad-model.aspx. Accessed 04 Aug 2016

  • Erbe C, Reichmuth C, Cunningham K, Lucke K, Dooling R (2016) Communication masking in marine mammals: a review and research strategy. Mar Pollut Bull 103:15–38

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (2016) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P6-TA-2004-0047&language=EN&ring=B6-2004-0089. Accessed 4 Aug 2016

    Google Scholar 

  • Federation of American Scientists (2016) http://fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/es310/SNR_PROP/snr_prop.htm. Accessed 4 Aug 2016

  • Hildebrand JA (2004a) Impacts of anthropogenic sound on cetaceans. International Whaling Commission, IWC/SC/56/E13

    Google Scholar 

  • Hildebrand JA (2004b) Sources of Anthropogenic Sound in the Marine Environment, in: Marine Mammal Commission, Joint Nature Conservaton (eds), International Policy Workshop on Sound and Marine Mammals, London, p 16

    Google Scholar 

  • Hildebrand JA (2009) Anthropogenic and natural sources of ambient noise in the ocean. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 395:5–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Seas) (1995) Ices Cooperative Research Report No. 209: Underwater Noise of Research Vessels. http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Cooperative%20Research%20Report%20%28CRR%29/crr209/CRR209.pdf#search=Report%20underwater%20noise%20209

  • ISO (2014) ISO 12913-1:2014(E) Acoustics—Soundscape—Part1: Definitions and conceptual framework

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2016) ISO/DIS 18405.2:2016(E) DRAFT international standard Underwater acoustics—terminology

    Google Scholar 

  • Jepson PD, Arbelo M, Deaville R, Patterson IAP, Castro P, Baker JR, Degollada E, Ross HM, Herraez P, Pocknell AM, Rodriguez F, Howie FE, Espinosa A, Reid RJ, Jaber JR, Martin V, Cunningham AA, Fernandez A (2003) Gas-bubble lesions in stranded cetaceans. Nature 425:575–576

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kastelein RA, Gransier R, Hoek L, Macleod A, Terhune JM (2012) Hearing threshold shifts and recovery in harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) after octave-band noise exposure at 4 kHz. J Acoust Soc Am 132:2745–2761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kliewer G (2014) Seismic vessel survey is expanded to include additional vessel types. Offshore Magazine, pp 52–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Kujawa SG, Liberman MC (2009) Adding insult to injury: cochlear nerve degeneration after “temporary” noise-induced hearing loss. J Neurosci 29:14077–14085

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Milton DA (2001) Assessing the susceptibility y to fishing of populations of rare trawl bycatch: sea snakes caught by Australia’s northern prawn fishery. Biological Conserv Biol 101:281–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulsow J, Houser DS, Finneran JJ (2014) Aerial hearing thresholds and detection of hearing loss in male California sea lions (Zalophus californianus) using auditory evoked potentials. Marine Mammal Science, n/a-n/a

    Google Scholar 

  • Muscolino MS (2012) Fishing and whaling. In: McNeill JR, Mauldin ES (eds) A companion to global environmental history. Wiley Blackwell, Oxford, pp 279–296

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (2016a) Technical guidance for assessing the effects of anthropogenic sound on marine mammal hearing: Underwater acoustic thresholds for onset of permanent and temporary threshold shifts. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR-55 July 2016

    Google Scholar 

  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (2016b) https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/feature-news/acoustics. Accessed 4 Aug 2016

  • National Research Council (2003) Ocean noise and marine mammals. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2005) Marine mammal populations and ocean noise—determining when noise causes biologically significant effects. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of Naval Research (2016) Marine Mammal Programme. http://www.onr.navy.mil/en/Science-Technology/Departments/Code-32/All-Programs/Atmosphere-Research-322/Marine-Mammals-Biology/Marine-Mammal-Biology-Thrusts.aspx. Accessed 4 Aug 2016

  • Ona E, Godø OR, Handegard NO, Hjellvik V, Patel R, Pedersen G (2007) Silent research vessels are not quiet. J Acoust Soc Am 121:EL145–EL150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patrick WS, Spencer P, Ormseth O, Cope J, Field J, Kobayashi D, Gedamke T, Cortés E, Bigelow K, Overholtz W, Link J, Lawson P (2009) Use of Productivity and Susceptibility Indices to Determine Stock Vulnerability, with Example Applications to Six U.S. Fisheries: NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-101 U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper AN, Hawkins AD, Fay RR, Mann DA, Bartol S, Carlson TJ, Coombs S, Ellison WT, Gentry RL, Halvorsen MB, Loekkeborg S, Rogers PH, Southall BL, Zeddies DGN, Tavolga W (2014) Sound exposure guidelines for fishes and sea turtles: a technical report prepared by ANSI-Accredited Standards Committee S3/SC1 and registered with ANSI. ASA S3/SC1.4 TR-2014. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Port of Los Angeles (2016) https://www.portoflosangeles.org/environment/ogv.asp. Accessed 4 Aug 2016

  • Richardson WJ, Greene CRJ, Malme CI, Thomson DH (1995) Marine mammals and noise. Academic, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Roch MA, Batchelor H, Baumann-Pickering S, Berchok CL, Cholewiak D, Fujioka E, Garland EC, Herbert S, Hildebrand JA, Oleson EM, Van Parijs S, Risch D, Širović A, Soldevilla MS (2016) Management of acoustic metadata for bioacoustics. Eco Inform 31:122–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roman J, Estes JA, Morissette L, Smith C, Costa D, McCarthy J, Nation JB, Nicol S, Pershing A, Smetacek V (2014) Whales as marine ecosystem engineers. Front Ecol Environ 12:377–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson SD, Radford AN, Nedelec SL, Ferrari MCO, Chivers DP, McCormick MI, Meekan MG (2015) Anthropogenic noise increases fish mortality by predation. Nat Commun 7:10544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slabbekoorn H, Bouton N, van Opzeeland I, Coers A, ten Cate C, Popper AN (2010) A noisy spring: the impact of globally rising underwater sound levels on fish. Trends Ecol Evol 25:419–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solan M, Hauton C, Godbold JA, Wook CL, Leighton TG, White P (2016) Anthropogenic sources of underwater sound can modify how sediment-dwelling invertebrates mediate ecosystem properties. Sci Rep 6:20540

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Southall B, Bowles A, Ellison W, Finneran J, Gentry R, Greene C, Kastak D, Ketten D, Miler J, Nachtigall P, Richardson W, Thomas J, Tyack P (2007a) Marine mammal noise exposure criteria: initial scientific recommendations. Aquat Mamm 33:411–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Southall BL, Moretti D, Abraham B, Calambokidis J, DeRuiter SL, Tyack PL (2012) Marine mammal behavioural response study in Southern California: advances in technology and experimental methods. Mar Technol Soc J 46:48–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternlicht DD (1999) Looking back: a history of marine seismic exploration. Potentials IEEE 18:36–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stobutzki I, Miller M, Brewer D (2001) Sustainability of fishery bycatch: a process for assessing highly diverse a nd numerous bycatch. Environ Conserv Biol 28:167–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Tasker ML, Amundin M, Andre M, Hawkins A, Lang W, Merck T, Scholik-Schlomer A, Teilmann J, Thomsen F, Werner DMZ (2010) Marine Strategy Directive Framework Task Group 11 Report Underwater noise and other forms of energy in: ICES, E.U.A. (ed)

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Opzeeland I (2010) Acoustic ecology of marine mammals in polar oceans, Alfred-Wegener Institute for Polar & Marine Research, Bremerhaven Ocean Acoustics Lab Germany & University of Bremen Germany. University of Bremen and Alfred—Wegener Insitute Bremerhaven, p 427

    Google Scholar 

  • Zitterbart DP, Kindermann L, Burkhardt E, Boebel O (2013) Automatic round-the-clock detection of whales for mitigation from underwater noise impacts. PLoS One 8:e71217

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank Michael Ainslie, René Dekeling and the editors of this book for their most helpful comments on the manuscript as it evolved.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Alfred-Wegener-Institut Helmholtz-Zentrum für Polar- und Meeresforschung, Bremerhaven, Germany

    Olaf Boebel, Elke Burkhardt & Ilse van Opzeeland

Authors
  1. Olaf Boebel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elke Burkhardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ilse van Opzeeland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Olaf Boebel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. German Advisory Council on the Environment, Berlin, Germany

    Markus Salomon

  2. University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany

    Till Markus

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Boebel, O., Burkhardt, E., van Opzeeland, I. (2018). Input of Energy/Underwater Sound. In: Salomon, M., Markus, T. (eds) Handbook on Marine Environment Protection . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60156-4_24

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation