Concerns about the Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) programme refuse to die down in Andhra Pradesh, with scientists and farmers saying water resources are depleting and emissions from factories are polluting the air, water, and soil.

Buoyed by the encouraging results of the Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) programme, which was introduced in India as a pilot project in 2001, the Central government in 2020 decided to advance the target of 20% ethanol blending in petrol from 2030 to 2025 as the way towards a greener future. The EBP programme was said to be the way of addressing multiple concerns — of growing energy consumption, oil imports, and increasing carbon emissions from vehicles. Under the EBP, ethanol is made using grains, such as broken rice and corn, and is therefore said to double farmers’ income as well.

As of 2024, the blend percentage was 15% in the country. To meet the required target of 20% ethanol in petrol by 2025-26, 1,016 crore litres of ethanol would be required. The Centre announced relaxations in the application processes for environmental clearance and also offered subsidies on purchase of grains to ensure a smoother process for ethanol factories.

Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Haryana and Punjab have the highest number of ethanol factories in the country, contributing a substantial portion to the overall production capacity of 947 crore litres in 2022, as per information provided by former Union Minister of State for Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Sadhvi Niranjan Jyoti, to the Lok Sabha.

Since 2024, there have been continuous protests at the Gummaladoddi, Gandepalli, Arugolanu villages in Andhra Pradesh against the EBP programme. All the three villages are located near a river or a canal, which is the source of drinking water and agricultural needs. Lokayukta officials had also said officials of the Pollution Control Board had failed to take action in 2022 against a factory producing ethanol since 2008 in Gandepalli despite knowing that effluents were being discharged into a nearby canal, which is used by farmers for agricultural purposes.

Much of the confusion regarding how polluting an ethanol plant can be arises from the fact that environmental clearances do not mention emissions to begin with. Experts say that hazardous, cancer-causing chemicals such as acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, and acrolein are some of the emissions from ethanol factories, but these don’t find a mention in the clearances given to the ethanol factories in the East Godavari, Krishna and NTR districts in the State, as per environmentalists.

All ethanol production plants and distilleries fall under the ‘red category’, which means that they have a pollution score of 60 or more, as per Central government norms. But to facilitate a smoother and quicker clearance process, the Centre has allowed them to be set up without public hearings. Many of them are near human settlements.

Farmers also fear that the water-guzzling factories will leave them with no water for their crops. Their fears are not unfounded. Scientists for People, a collective of scientists based in Hyderabad, argue that a grain-based ethanol factory requires 8-12 litres of water per litre of ethanol. With the flow in perennial rivers such as the Krishna being lean for most of the year, factories located near these rivers depend on groundwater, which is a contravention of the rules.

A Niti Aayog report states that when petrol was blended with 20% of the biofuel, carbon monoxide reduced by 30% in four wheelers and 50% in two wheelers. While this may be true, scientists and environmentalists ask of what use the EBP programme is if the gains achieved are negated by the harmful chemicals released into the atmosphere during the process. On the one hand, environmentalists say the processes involved in the making of biofuel make it more harmful for the environment. On the other, industrialists say many factories cannot afford pollution control measures because of rising production and labour costs.

Without dismissing environmentalists for being “anti-development”, the governments would do well to listen to their concerns and adopt corrective measures. After all, their collective goal remains the same — to work towards a greener future. This cannot come at the cost of agriculture, health, and the riparian rights of the people.