THE ASIAN INDEPENDENT UK
-Ravinder Singh Sodhi
Hardly a day passes without some controversy over ethanol-blended petrol in India. At the centre of the debate is E20—petrol containing up to 20 per cent ethanol. The Government considers ethanol blending an important step towards reducing India’s dependence on imported crude oil, saving foreign exchange, supporting agriculture and reducing emissions. The automobile industry has also supported the transition and has been preparing vehicles for higher ethanol blends.
Yet a large number of vehicle owners have their own concerns. Some complain of reduced mileage, while others fear that prolonged use of E20 may affect components of older vehicles. The more serious question is what happens if a vehicle suffers damage: who will establish the cause, and who will bear the cost?
The controversy became particularly interesting recently when the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM) withdrew an earlier warning concerning possible damage associated with contaminated ethanol-blended fuel, saying that the data required further verification. The episode inevitably raised questions among consumers. Was the original assessment wrong? Was it based on insufficient data? Or was the withdrawal influenced by other considerations? At present, it would be unfair to answer such questions without independent evidence. What consumers can reasonably demand, however, is clear and transparent information.
The Government’s position is equally clear. It says that E20 has undergone laboratory testing, field validation and large-scale real-world use, and that more than 20 crore two-wheelers and more than 3 crore petrol cars have been operating on E15-E20 blends without verified evidence of widespread engine failure attributable to ethanol blending. The Government also says that manufacturers continue to honour warranty obligations for vehicles using E20 fuel.
Thus, there are two positions before the public: the Government and automobile industry say that E20 is safe when used according to vehicle specifications, while many vehicle owners remain concerned about mileage, ageing vehicles and possible long-term effects. The truth needs to be established through independent evidence rather than through claims from either side.
Why does India need ethanol?
India imports a large proportion of the crude oil it consumes. Ethanol produced domestically offers one way of replacing a part of that imported petroleum. According to government figures, India’s ethanol-blending programme has also resulted in substantial foreign-exchange savings and payments to farmers. By December 2025, the Government reported cumulative foreign-exchange savings of more than ₹1.90 lakh crore and payments to farmers exceeding ₹1.60 lakh crore since the 2014-15 ethanol supply year.
Ethanol is produced from several agricultural sources, including sugarcane-derived products, maize and rice. Thus the programme has an agricultural as well as an energy dimension. It creates a market for agricultural produce and provides an additional source of income for farmers and sugar mills.
But even here the picture is not entirely simple. The diversion of agricultural produce towards ethanol can create competing demands for food, sugar and fuel. In August 2026, for example, the Government was considering restricting the use of sugarcane for ethanol because of concerns about declining sugar supplies and rising sugar prices. This illustrates that every energy policy also has economic and agricultural consequences.
What is different about ethanol?
Ethanol is chemically different from petrol. One important difference is its energy content: ethanol contains less energy per litre than gasoline. Consequently, increasing the proportion of ethanol can affect fuel economy, although the actual effect depends on the vehicle and its engine calibration.
Ethanol also has different solvent and water-attracting properties from conventional petrol. For this reason, the compatibility of fuel-system materials, seals, pumps and other components becomes increasingly important as the ethanol concentration rises.
But it would be wrong to conclude that ethanol automatically damages every older vehicle. Vehicle design, materials, ethanol concentration, fuel quality, storage conditions and duration of use all matter. An international study examining E10, E15 and E20 compatibility in vehicles from countries including India, China, Japan and others found that vehicle technology and fuel-system design have evolved to incorporate ethanol-compatible materials.
The important question of older vehicles
This is perhaps the most sensitive part of the Indian debate.
SIAM states that vehicles manufactured from 2008 were material-compatible with E10. For E20, the industry’s stated roadmap was different: new vehicles were to become material-compatible with E20 from April 2023, while E20 vehicles with optimised engine performance and fuel economy were to be introduced from 2025-26.
This distinction is important. Being “material-compatible” is not necessarily the same as being a vehicle specifically optimised for E20.
Therefore, the question is not simply whether a new E20-compatible car can run on E20. The more difficult question is what happens to vehicles manufactured many years earlier, when petrol contained much less ethanol.
The Government itself acknowledges that E20 can result in a marginal reduction in fuel efficiency in four-wheelers designed for E10 and calibrated for E20.
This does not establish that every older vehicle will suffer damage. It does, however, justify asking whether owners of older vehicles have been adequately informed about the change in fuel composition and its possible consequences.
What does the world tell us?
The idea of using ethanol as a motor fuel is much older than the present Indian debate. In the nineteenth century, ethanol was already being used in experiments with internal-combustion engines. In 1826, Samuel Morey developed an engine that ran on ethanol and turpentine, while German inventor Nikolaus Otto used ethanol in one of his engines in 1860.
Henry Ford also had an early connection with ethanol. His first automobile, built in 1896, ran on pure ethanol. The Model T, introduced in 1908, was designed to run on gasoline, ethanol or a mixture of the two. Ford therefore regarded alcohol fuel as a serious possibility for the automobile, although it would be historically incorrect to call him the inventor of ethanol-blended petrol.
In the United States, ethanol eventually became widely used as a blending component of gasoline. Today E10 is the dominant blend, while E15 and E85 are also available under specific conditions; E85 is intended for flex-fuel vehicles.
Brazil provides a particularly interesting example. It developed a large fleet of flex-fuel vehicles capable of using gasoline, ethanol-gasoline mixtures and, in suitable vehicles, very high concentrations of ethanol. Brazil’s experience therefore involves not only changing the fuel but also developing vehicles capable of handling high ethanol concentrations.
Japan has followed a more cautious path. Its fuel-quality legislation provides for bioethanol blending of up to 10 per cent in gasoline.
China presents yet another model. Rather than relying primarily on increasing ethanol in petrol, China has moved aggressively towards electric and new-energy vehicles. China presents a very different trajectory: its rapidly expanding electric-vehicle market is reducing the country’s dependence on petrol for new passenger vehicles. This makes China’s experience fundamentally different from India’s present emphasis on replacing a portion of petrol with ethanol.
The international experience therefore does not provide one universal formula. Countries have adopted different combinations of ethanol blending, flex-fuel vehicles, electric vehicles and other alternatives according to their resources, technology, agricultural conditions and energy policies.
Brazil and India: an important difference
Brazil’s experience deserves particular attention because it demonstrates an alternative approach to high ethanol use.
Brazil did not merely increase the ethanol content of fuel for an unchanged fleet of conventional petrol vehicles. It developed a large flex-fuel vehicle market in which vehicles were specifically designed to operate with varying proportions of gasoline and ethanol. This gives motorists considerably greater flexibility.
India’s E20 transition is different. The country is introducing a much higher ethanol proportion into the mainstream petrol supply while a huge existing fleet of vehicles remains on the roads.
That difference does not prove that India’s policy is wrong. But it is a legitimate reason to ask whether the transition arrangements for older Indian vehicles have been adequate.
What should the vehicle owner know?
A person buying a new vehicle can ask whether it is E20-compatible and whether its engine has been optimised for E20. But what about someone who purchased a car, scooter or motorcycle ten or fifteen years ago?
If the vehicle’s mileage declines, who should establish whether E20 is responsible? If a fuel-system component deteriorates, how can the owner know whether the cause is ethanol, contaminated fuel, ordinary ageing or some other mechanical problem?
And if E20 is the only petrol available, what choice does the owner of an older vehicle actually have?
These questions deserve clear answers.
The solution is not necessarily to reject ethanol. Nor should every complaint about a vehicle automatically be attributed to E20. What is needed is independent testing, transparent data and a clear system for determining responsibility when genuine fuel-related damage occurs.
Ethanol may well be an important part of India’s energy future. It can help reduce dependence on imported oil, support agriculture and contribute to environmental goals. But a successful fuel policy must also take into account the millions of vehicles already on the road and the people who depend on them.
The real question, therefore, is not simply whether ethanol is good or bad. It is whether India can achieve its economic and environmental objectives while also protecting the interests of the ordinary vehicle owner. That is a question that deserves a clear, evidence-based answer.
Ravinder Singh Sodhi
Calgary, Canada
PS: “I am neither an automobile expert nor a specialist in engines or fuels. The technical facts, figures and information presented in this article are based on my research of publicly available information on the internet. My purpose is not to argue for or against ethanol, but to examine the issue from different perspectives and provide the general reader with information that may help in understanding this important and controversial subject.”
