Who actually wants the Dublin Airport passenger cap abolished?

we live on an island. Having a cap on the number of people who can come and go is ridiculous

It is not rocket science, the 10 million extra people who will travel probably want it abolished.

Are you aware the cap is illegal? It's in the courts... I'm sick of the dishonesty... you all care about emissions etc? Addressing the chronic infrastructure deficit here, which they refuse to do, would cut emissions drastically. We've had electrified rail for decades, we don't have commercial size battery planes yet...

I would be interested to find the breakdown of that figure. There seem to be a number of figures suggested for the increase - from 4 million to 10 million but the commonest seems to be an increase from 32m to 40m i.e. 8m. How many of these business travellers? Tourists? What is their ultimate destination - i.e. are they simply using Dublin as a transfer hub? How will they travel to and from the city centre?

8m passengers would be 4m each way. If the majority (let's say 80%) stay in Dublin for 3 nights then we are looking at 9.6m bed nights per year - which is just under 9000 bed nights for each night of the year which at roughly 2 to the room is 4500 hotel/airbnb rooms. If you increase the cap you need to add those rooms. Airbnb is already squeezing accomodation in the city and hotels and residential housing have to compete for construction and infrastructure resources.

These 3.2m passengers each way (9000 per day) have to use the current transport infrastructure to get to and from Dublin Airport.

If the number of passengers using Dublin as a transfer hub quadruples - does the airport have the capacity to handle this - restaurants, toilets etc?

The point is that the likes of O'Leary and the DAA can come out with these requests oblivious to the downstream effects. I would love to see their plans that outline the consequences of their actions and how they think they can be dealt with.

its a good question.

firstly, the old chestnut of a "few people".

this is a common refrain from those who want to silence debate (various vested interests), or those who know absolutely nothing about the issue other than they're angry because the gutter press told them it was a nanny state bureaucacy thing. (for a nice sum no doubt).

so anyway, the flights pass over the entire width of dublin from east-west/west-east. and beyond.

and no you didn't have to move your home into way of the flight path which was already there, in certain cases the flight path came to you.

this is what certain interests use to dismiss the issue and paint it to the dumb masses as a 'few people' in the immediate surrounds whinging.

the rest of the debate may continue, win lose draw or whatever results.

But dont be taken in by that 'few people' shyte. they know that to be bollox, and they're repeating it to you. thats a fact. if nothing else, if more flights means the second coming and peace on earth, they are still lying to you.

I think it's stupid it's in operation since 2007(the passenger cap that is) before terminal 2 was opened, we have the new runway let's take advantage of it, we are well able for 45M a year , and they said ages ago that they wouldn't open a 3rd terminal until it hits 55M passengers a year which at this stage seems unlikely if they continue this ridiculous cap , less flights to keep it under 32M mean more planes being full and there for no more availability

Im laughing at people who think lifting the cap will bring in all these extra passengers to spend money in the economy.

All it does is increase the amount of people leaving Ireland for two weeks to the canaries amounting to a net zero contribution to the economy😀

Not affected by the noise. But what will the increase in emissions mean in terms of our carbon budget? Will we have to spend "billions on purchasing carbon credits", or will an increase of flight activity not affect that number?:

it’s a cap in that restricts the number of people who can come and go.

The cap was introduced with the grant for T2, which was designed for 32m. With other works since there, and other efficiencies, the airport can do more than that now, but nowhere near 45m. The runway could handle 80-90m, but there are bottlenecks like security.
DAA have 2 applications in at the minute, 36m with no works, based on an assessment of current capacity.
And 40m based on a huge infrastructure upgrade. By the time that work is complete, and others, it will probably end up around 44m.

I don't get the fear of saying no to unrestricted expansion of the airport company.

Its bursting at the seams.

Move everything to Dublin Mega City one and drag all the population through one bottleneck seems a little myopic.

What do people gain by making it even busier more congested.

They don't keep me awake and my partner uses ear plugs. But the planes aren't even the reason for that.

Wouldn't triple glazing etc help? OP could probably cash-in on the increase in house prices with higher number of passengers (more jobs, metrolink etc) and move somewhere not too far but far enough to be away from the noise.

It's sounds unfair to hold the whole country back for the convenience of a village/town.