Ethanol, a fuel, not the fuel of choice

India's ethanol programme is being presented as a runaway success. Gains are real: lower crude oil imports, forex savings, higher incomes for farmers and sugar mills, and an E20 blending target achieved ahead of schedule. As an energy security strategy, it has undeniable merit. But good policy becomes bad policy when success turns it into dogma. Ethanol is no longer being promoted as one option in the decarbonisation toolkit, but as the solution. It isn't. Every litre of ethanol delivers less energy than petrol, meaning motorists travel fewer kilometres on a tank. Consumers are effectively being asked to pay the same - or more - for fuel that offers lower mileage. If that's the intended trade-off, it should be stated openly, not murmured behind blending mandates.

The bigger concern lies beyond the fuel pump. India's ethanol story has shifted from sugarcane to maize, with grain now driving production and reshaping agricultural markets. Land is moving away from pulses and oilseeds towards maize, while food, feed and fuel compete for the same crop. The result is mounting pressure on food prices, rising edible oil and pulse imports, greater stress on groundwater and ecosystems, and fresh distortions in cropping patterns.

Yes, India needs to clean up vehicular pollution and bump up energy security. But the goal should be cleaner mobility and diversification, not just higher ethanol consumption. That means allowing hybrids, EVs, cleaner ICE and sustainable biofuels to compete on environmental merit. Consumers shouldn't face a false choice: buy ethanol-laden fuel or pay more for the 'normal' stuff. Public policy must protect consumer choice and be driven by measurable environmental outcomes. Not by replacing one rigid dependence with another.