Gadkari calls E20 backlash a paid campaign as government clears way for E100 fuel
Union road transport minister Nitin Gadkari labeled criticism of the 20% ethanol petrol blend as a paid campaign, just as the government approved flex-fuel vehicles that can run on up to 100% ethanol.
Union road transport minister Nitin Gadkari described the outcry against the 20% ethanol-blended petrol (E20) as a paid campaign, rejecting claims that the blend harms fuel efficiency or older engines. His comments arrived a day after the Centre amended motor vehicle regulations to allow flex-fuel vehicles to operate on blends with up to 100% ethanol, known as E100. The E20 rollout earlier this year had sparked protests from motorists concerned about reduced mileage and compatibility with older cars, and opposition politicians questioned the decision to set E20 as the default fuel at all Indian petrol pumps by April 2025.
By expanding permissible ethanol content, the government hopes to cut the nation's oil import costs and promote domestic bio-fuel production. The policy change marks a decisive step toward larger-scale ethanol use in India's transport sector. Critics, however, remain skeptical about the practical implications for vehicle performance and fuel infrastructure.
Why it matters
The policy could lower India's oil imports and reshape the domestic fuel market by promoting higher-ethanol blends.
How the sides frame it
MODERATE AGREEMENTCenter coverage highlights the minister dismissing backlash as a paid campaign and stresses the push toward E100 to cut oil imports, while right-leaning coverage emphasizes that the government will not increase the blend beyond 20% and labels higher-blend claims as a contrived narrative.
CENTER
Centrist coverage frames the ethanol policy as a justified economic move, portraying backlash as a paid campaign and focusing on benefits like reduced oil imports and domestic bio-fuel growth.
RIGHT
Right-leaning coverage frames the policy as limited to 20%, dismissing higher-blend rumors as contrived and stressing the large savings passed to farmers.
The right emphasises
- no plan to raise blend beyond 20%
- claims of higher blends are a contrived narrative
- savings passed to farmers
In this story
Related stories
2 in this thread