Toronto has committed to achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2040. This target, part of the city’s TransformTO strategy, includes a 65% reduction in emissions by 2030. Meeting these goals will require significant reductions across all sectors, including transportation.
As the Ontario government moves to expand Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport (YTZ) and permit jet aircraft, TAF reflects on how this proposal relates to Toronto’s climate objectives.
What the province is proposing
In early 2026, the province announced plans to take over the City of Toronto’s role in the airport’s tripartite agreement and enable runway expansion to accommodate jets. The Toronto Port Authority’s modernization plan includes infrastructure upgrades, changes to the runway, and the introduction of modern jet aircraft.
Passenger volumes would increase significantly. The airport currently serves about 2 million passengers annually. Under the expansion plan, that number would quintuple to 10 million.
Proponents argue that the expansion would improve regional connectivity, relieve pressure on Pearson Airport, and support economic growth. Experts and local stakeholders have raised concerns about noise, air quality, and the broader implications for climate and livability—including that building height restrictions along the airport’s eastern flight approach may threaten long-established plans for high-rise housing in the East Waterfront community.
How an expansion would change Toronto’s emissions profile
Billy Bishop’s current operations already contribute a notable share of emissions in the downtown core. In 2024, aircraft activity at the airport generated approximately 64,000 tonnes of CO₂-equivalent emissions. This figure includes fuel burned by aircraft but does not account for emissions from ground operations or surface traffic to and from the terminal.
Allowing jets would increase these emissions substantially. A five-fold increase in passenger volumes could lead to emissions of over 300,000 tonnes annually, roughly equivalent to the annual emissions of more than 70,000 gasoline-powered vehicles. While some of this demand might be shifted from other airports, Pearson Airport’s LIFT project contemplates growth of 18-20 million additional passengers by the early 2030s, suggesting a region-wide surge in aviation traffic if both projects advance.
TAF’s latest GTHA Emissions Inventory notes that transportation accounts for more than a third of all regional emissions, and this expansion would lock in a new source of growing emissions when the city is struggling to stay on track for its 65% reduction target by 2030.
Could cleaner fuels help?
Some have pointed to sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs) and newer aircraft as potential mitigations. While modern jets such as the Airbus A220 are more efficient than older models, they still rely on fossil fuels. SAFs are in limited supply and currently make up less than 0.5% of global aviation fuel use.
Canada’s Aviation Climate Action Plan targets broader SAF adoption by 2030, but timelines and scalability remain uncertain. Electric and hydrogen aircraft are still in early development and unlikely to be deployed at scale before 2040.
In short, any emissions reductions from cleaner aircraft or fuels are unlikely to offset the increase in emissions from higher passenger volumes and jet operations in the near term.
Air quality and health impacts
A 2013 Health Impact Assessment (HIA) by Toronto Public Health found that airport operations contributed 10% to 15% of local air pollution in surrounding neighbourhoods. Pollutants included nitrogen dioxide (NO₂), particulate matter (PM), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
The HIA concluded that these emissions increased risks of respiratory and cardiovascular illness, and in some cases, cancer. It also found that prevailing winds carried emissions across the downtown core, affecting a wide area.
More recently, a University of Toronto study in the Bathurst Quay neighbourhood found that airport activity was the primary source of ultrafine particles (UFPs) in the area. These particles, which can penetrate deep into the lungs and bloodstream, were found at levels exceeding World Health Organization guidelines during peak airport operations.
At the Bathurst Quay ferry terminal, UFP concentrations exceeded WHO good practice guidelines 25% of the time on an hourly basis and 80% of the time on a daily basis. Peak concentrations reached over 100,000 particles per cubic centimetre—levels more commonly associated with major highways.
The impact on neighbourhoods and livability
Billy Bishop’s location is unusual for a commercial airport. It sits just across a narrow channel from downtown Toronto, adjacent to high-density residential areas like CityPlace and Bathurst Quay. Over 20,000 people now live in these neighbourhoods, with schools, parks, and community centres located within a few hundred metres of the terminal.
Toronto Public Health has noted that these areas already experience higher rates of childhood vulnerability, low income, and chronic illness compared to city averages. These communities would disproportionately bear the brunt of any increase in jet noise and pollution.
Increased airport activity would also affect surface transportation. The airport’s single access point at the foot of Bathurst Street already experiences congestion. The projected rise in passenger volumes would lead to substantially more vehicle trips, increasing local air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
Learning from other jurisdictions
Many cities around the world have wrestled with what to do with centrally located airports. Cities from Berlin to Hong Kong to Denver have all closed their inner-city airports. Where airports were retained, like London City Airport, approval came with strict conditions like limits on weekend flights.
In Toronto, the UP Express has dramatically enhanced Pearson Airport’s connectivity from Union Station, with comparable travel times to Billy Bishop. Upcoming transit investments, like the extension of the Eglinton Crosstown, are further enhancing regional access to Pearson Airport.
Most notably, the proposed Alto high-speed rail corridor between Toronto and Quebec City could offer a lower-emission alternative to short-haul flights. As electrified rail becomes more viable, the case for expanding downtown air capacity may further weaken.
Climate and quality of life should be part of the discussion
TAF’s analysis of the proposal to expand Billy Bishop Airport is an example of how economic proposals today must meet the test of improving people’s everyday lives, align with climate and public health priorities.
There is no public consultation open yet on this proposal, but we recommend letting your elected officials know that a careful, evidence-based assessment of the emissions, air quality, and equity implications is essential. Toronto has hard-fought climate targets and a responsibility to protect its residents’ well-being.
There is one more element (and you do touch on it briefly) that is concerned with the to-and-fro. I have spent anxious minutes in traffic hoping to make it to the city-side of Billy Bishop. Improved and rapid connectivity to/from Union needs to be considered – and consistent – not tied to whether there is Jays game nor other sports activity.