Contents
Introduction
India’s ethanol program, driven by the Ethanol Blending Programme (EBP), aims to blend 20% ethanol in petrol by 2025 to enhance energy security and reduce crude imports. However, the increasing use of food crops like maize as feedstock for ethanol raises the classic “Fuel vs. Feed” dilemma, risking livestock feed security, food inflation, and environmental degradation. This necessitates a critical evaluation of the economic, environmental, and policy implications of maize-based ethanol production.
Economic Implications
- Energy and Forex Savings: Ethanol blending could save India up to $4 billion annually in crude oil imports. It provides an economic stimulus to rural areas through higher prices for maize (₹24,000–25,000/tonne vs. MSP ₹2,225/qtl).
- Feed and Livestock Sector Crisis: Poultry and dairy sectors, which consume 55–65% of maize, are facing feed shortages and price hikes, pushing up consumer food inflation (CPI for meat/eggs rose to 7% in March 2024). Soybean growers suffer due to price crash (~30%), as DDGS (Distillers’ Dried Grains with Solubles) substitutes soybean meal.
- Market Volatility and Trade Imbalances: From being a net exporter, India imported 0.94 mt of maize (April–Jan 2024-25) from Myanmar and Ukraine. With projected maize demand of 12.7 mt for ethanol in 2024-25, the deficit may reach 5–6 mt, driving calls to liberalize GM maize imports.
Environmental Implications
- Monocropping and Soil Degradation: Intensive maize cultivation for ethanol promotes monocropping, risking biodiversity, pest outbreaks, and groundwater depletion.
- Clean Fuel vs. Unsustainable Farming: While ethanol is a cleaner-burning fuel, the environmental cost of its grain-based production may offset climate gains if not regulated with agro-ecological practices.
Genetically Modified (GM) Maize: Benefits vs. Risks
| Benefits | Risks |
| ● GM maize can boost yields, reduce pesticide use, and meet industrial ethanol needs without competing with food chains. ● Eases domestic supply crunch, ensuring price stability in feed markets.
| ● Regulatory vacuum and lack of public trust in GM crops. ● Cross-contamination risks in food/feed channels despite industrial-use-only policies. ● Biodiversity threats, especially in absence of a proper biosafety framework.
|
Alternative Strategies
- Boost Maize Productivity: India’s current yield is ~3 tonnes/ha vs. global average of 6 tonnes/ha. Invest in HYV seeds, R&D, precision farming.
- Second-Generation (2G) Biofuels: Promote ethanol from agri-residues (e.g., paddy straw, bagasse) as per the National Policy on Biofuels (2018).
- Agro-Ecological Crop Diversification: Encourage maize over water-guzzling paddy in Punjab–Haryana belt, aligning with NITI Aayog’s diversification plan.
- Dynamic MSP and Flexible Trade Policy: Ensure fair prices for soybean and maize; allow temporary GM maize imports under industrial licenses with strict traceability.
- Integrated Governance: Create a Food-Fuel Monitoring Cell with representatives from Agriculture, Food, Petroleum, and Environment Ministries to ensure balanced policy.
Conclusion
India’s ethanol policy must not pit energy security against food and feed security. While maize-based ethanol offers economic and strategic benefits, its expansion must be guided by scientific evidence, ecological prudence, and policy integration. A shift toward non-food feedstocks, productivity gains, and calibrated imports is essential for a resilient, inclusive, and sustainable biofuel economy aligned with India@2047 goals.
