top of page

By:

Sagari Gupta

24 March 2026 at 2:16:04 pm

From Green Fuel to Strategic Fuel

India’s ethanol revolution will succeed only if its costs are shared more fairly. On June 13, Union Minister Nitin Gadkari approved regulations giving E100 fuel legal status in India. The move does more than add two new fuel grades to India’s pumps. It marks the evolution of ethanol from a green fuel and sugar-surplus solution into a strategic fuel designed to reduce India’s exposure to external energy shocks. For over a decade, the older version of the ethanol programme delivered real,...

From Green Fuel to Strategic Fuel

India’s ethanol revolution will succeed only if its costs are shared more fairly. On June 13, Union Minister Nitin Gadkari approved regulations giving E100 fuel legal status in India. The move does more than add two new fuel grades to India’s pumps. It marks the evolution of ethanol from a green fuel and sugar-surplus solution into a strategic fuel designed to reduce India’s exposure to external energy shocks. For over a decade, the older version of the ethanol programme delivered real, measurable gains. Union Minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas Hardeep Singh Puri said on June 4 that the ethanol blending programme has saved India Rs. 1.84 lakh crore in foreign exchange and added Rs. 1.58 lakh crore to farmers’ earnings since 2014-15, while substituting 302 lakh metric tonnes of crude oil and cutting 909 lakh metric tonnes of CO2 emissions. The new policy answers a harder question. India imports around 85 percent of its crude oil requirements. Tensions around the Strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of the world’s oil moves, keep reminding policymakers what that dependence costs. Gadkari has put India’s annual fossil fuel import bill at roughly Rs. 22 lakh crore, near $250 billion at current exchange rates. Every litre of ethanol that replaces imported crude is a small subtraction from that bill and a small addition to India’s room to manoeuvre when oil prices spike. That logic is sound. The fairness of the transition is a separate question. Uneven Costs Energy security is a public good: a steadier rupee, lower inflation and reduced reliance on oil exporters benefit the entire economy. Yet the costs are far less evenly shared. The immediate winners are sugar-producing states, distilleries and the government, which enjoys a lower import bill and greater diplomatic flexibility. Nor is the environmental case as straightforward as the carbon figures suggest. Producing a litre of sugarcane-based ethanol requires about 2,860 litres of water, according to NITI Aayog. Most ethanol comes from sugarcane and maize grown in Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Punjab - states already overexploiting groundwater. Ethanol is also competing with food and feed. Maize prices have risen as distilleries compete with the poultry industry, while India has shifted from being a maize exporter to an importer. The Centre for Study of Science, Technology and Policy estimates that meeting ethanol targets by 2030 could require additional maize acreage equivalent to a quarter of India’s farmland. In Rajasthan’s Tibbi, farmers have already protested against a new ethanol plant. A cleaner path exists. Second-generation ethanol made from paddy straw, sugarcane bagasse and other crop waste does not compete with food or fresh water the same way first-generation ethanol does. India has a handful of 2G plants running, including one at Panipat, but high capital costs and slow technology adoption keep them marginal next to sugarcane and grain-based ethanol. E85 and E100 need flex-fuel vehicles built for higher ethanol shares. Maruti Suzuki and Hero MotoCorp have begun rolling out flex-fuel models, but as of April this year no automaker had a vehicle commercially available that ran on E85, and Maruti’s own flex-fuel prototype only appeared in June. Neither company has disclosed what the flex-fuel variants will cost against standard petrol models. The fuel itself is cheaper at the pump. Delhi’s first E85 station, opened on June 5 at Indian Oil’s Pusa Road outlet, priced the fuel at Rs. 82.12 a litre, about Rs. 20 below regular E20 petrol. But ethanol carries less energy than petrol, and E85 cuts mileage by 20 to 35 percent compared with petrol. A cheaper litre that takes you fewer kilometres is not automatically a cheaper kilometre. Gadkari has asked the finance ministry to cut GST on E85 from 18 percent to 5 percent, which would help close that gap. The GST Council has not decided yet, and its decision in the coming weeks will tell us whether the government means to share the cost of this transition or leave it with early adopters. There is a fiscal cost behind the consumer one. Oil marketing companies are set to pay farmers close to Rs. 40,000 crore in 2025 alone under the blending programme, on top of the subsidies and soft loans that prop up ethanol distilleries. Infrastructure tells a similar story. The government’s rollout plan covers Delhi-NCR and the Mumbai-Pune-Nagpur corridor first, with a target of 500 E85 outlets by December 2026 and 5,000 by the end of 2027. A household outside those corridors that buys a flex-fuel vehicle today pays for infrastructure it cannot yet use. This is where the comparison with E20 matters. The earlier blending programme spread its costs thinly across every petrol buyer in the country, through a few percentage points of ethanol nobody had to think about or pay extra for. E85 and E100 work differently. They ask a smaller group of early adopters to absorb a vehicle upgrade, a pricing gap and an infrastructure lag all at once, in exchange for a national benefit every taxpayer will eventually share. Fairer Transition None of this is an argument against E85 and E100. India needs to cut its dependence on imported crude, and ethanol is the most realistic domestic substitute on the table right now. The environmental costs of first-generation ethanol are real too. The question is who absorbs its costs, and what kind of ethanol pays for it. The transition can be made fairer in four ways: extend any GST cut on E85 to flex-fuel vehicles; link vehicle sales to the availability of E85 pumps; require automakers to disclose price premiums and real-world mileage; and shift more incentives towards second-generation ethanol that does not strain water tables or food supplies. For a decade, India’s ethanol programme delivered foreign-exchange savings and higher farm incomes without imposing visible costs on consumers or water-stressed regions. E85 and E100 change that equation. They turn a public good - energy security - into an upfront private cost borne first by households and farming regions, while the wider benefits are shared by the country as a whole. (The writer is an independent public policy researcher. Views personal.)

The Unmaking of American Primacy

The decisive story of the 21st century is currently unfolding in the Persian Gulf. What was seen as another flare up between the US, Israel, and Iran has caused a structural shift in international relations. This conflict signals the weakening of the US dominated unipolar order and the rise of a fragmented, multipolar world. In this new landscape, power is measured less by military dominance than by energy security, strategic independence, and industrial strength.


Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution transformed it from a Western partner into a fierce opponent of Israel and the U.S. As Egypt, Jordan, and later Gulf states moved toward peace with Israel, Tehran doubled down by arming Hezbollah and Hamas while building a nuclear program it viewed as essential insurance against regime change.


Safeguarding Petrodollars

America’s involvement is not only military but deeply financial. Supporters of Israel stress the alliance’s moral and strategic value, while critics highlight the influence of the pro-Israel lobby, often seen as shaping U.S. policy at the expense of regional stability. At the core, however, lies Washington’s need to safeguard the petrodollar. For decades, global oil trade in dollars has sustained demand for the currency, underwriting U.S. deficits and military reach. Iran has consistently challenged this dominance, aligning with Russia and China both militarily and strategically. Past interventions in Iraq and Libya are often interpreted as efforts to neutralize threats to the petrodollar order.


Iran’s most potent asymmetric weapon lies in its control of the Strait of Hormuz. By granting passage to ‘friendly’ nations such as India and China while obstructing US linked vessels, Tehran has forced a fundamental reassessment of maritime security. Added to this is a psychological resilience born of deep-rooted fundamentalism and the drive to protect Islam forces that munitions cannot shatter. America’s failure to grasp this is a recurring theme from Afghanistan and Iraq, now replayed in the current conflict.


This war has exposed the imperial mindset of the United States. Across the Global South, Washington’s stance is widely seen as hypocritical. Russia is condemned as ‘cruel’ and a violator of international law for its actions in Ukraine, yet the U.S. claims moral authority while launching strikes on Iran or orchestrating the capture of leaders in Venezuela.


Critics argue that these military ventures reflect the desperate spasms of an imperial ego determined to preserve its image at any cost. Despite presiding over a superpower, President Trump’s desperation, anxiety, and insecurity are evident. His use of coarse language and unprecedented threats to annihilate entire civilizations underscore this volatility. The current two-week ceasefire appears more a manifestation of his desperation than of Iran’s defeat.


With the US trapped in the Middle Eastern quagmire, the Sino-Russian axis is gaining significant advantages. China has kept itself aloof since the conflict began. Its strategic petroleum reserve estimated at 1.3 to 1.4 billion barrels provides it a four-month cushion against the energy shocks. Beijing’s dominance over global manufacturing ensures that, even as oil prices surge, the world remains dependent on Chinese supply chains for critical transition technologies. By continuing to import Iranian oil through Hormuz and probably settling payments in yuan, China accelerates the rise of the petroyuan.


Russia has emerged as perhaps the greatest beneficiary of the war. Elevated crude prices have injected capital into its economy at a moment of fragility. The diversion of U.S. military assets toward Iran has granted Moscow breathing space in Ukraine. As European states grapple with soaring energy costs, the temptation to adopt a ‘survival first’ policy may push them toward rapprochement with Russia, sidelining Kyiv in favour of securing energy stability.


The conflict has exposed deep fissures within NATO. Several allies - including France, Germany, the UK, and Japan - have resisted involvement, while Spain and Switzerland denied U.S. requests to use their airspace for operations against Iran. This fragmentation coincides with the strengthening of the BRICS+ bloc, which has expanded to include Iran, the UAE, and Egypt, thus posing a growing challenge to the Western-led financial order.


Pragmatic Approach

India has defined its role through a pragmatic focus on national interest. Eschewing the moral policing that shaped Western responses to the Ukraine war, New Delhi has pursued calibrated multi alignment, balancing ties across rival blocs while safeguarding its priorities. Continued purchases of Russian oil, despite Western pressure and temporary U.S. tariffs, have provided a vital geoeconomic cushion. At the 2026 Munich Security Conference, EAM Jaishankar reaffirmed India’s commitment to strategic autonomy, stressing that energy choices are guided by domestic costs and risks rather than external dictates. This stance has helped India sustain one of the world’s fastest growth rates even as other major economies falter. While U.S. and Israeli vessels have faced blockades in the Persian Gulf, India’s diplomatic engagement with Tehran has secured safe passage for its ships. Since the conflict began, at least nine Indian vessels carrying LPG and crude have crossed the Strait of Hormuz without incident.


The crisis has reinforced the urgency of the Atma Nirbhar Bharat (Self Reliant India) mission. With 65 percent of its LPG and a large share of crude sourced from the Gulf, India remains vulnerable to Middle Eastern instability. The government’s excise duty cuts on fuel to offset surging prices have intensified the push for domestic resilience. Efforts now focus on accelerating deepwater exploration along the eastern coast and Andaman region, tapping an untapped hydrocarbon base of 12 billion tonnes. Capacity expansion of Strategic Petroleum Reserves has also been prioritized. Alongside, the Rare Earth Mission and the recently passed Jan Vishwas Bill reaffirm the government’s commitment to building a strong domestic ecosystem capable of shielding India from external shocks.


The global canvas is shifting with the rise of financial pluralism and the emergence of middle powers like India that refuse to take sides. In this new order, power is no longer defined solely by military might or dominance of a single currency, but by the ability to navigate a world of fractured multipolarity with clarity and resilience.


As Winston Churchill once remarked, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” For India, this war is not merely a challenge but an opportunity to redefine its role as a leading Indo Pacific power. India’s rise will depend not just on economic strength, but on the clarity of its vision and its refusal to be bound by rigid blocs.


(The author is a Chartered Accountant with a leading company in Mumbai. Views personal.)


Comments


bottom of page