EVs Not Sole Answer to Emission Cuts: Venu Srinivasan

May 12, 2026 — In a candid assessment of the global push toward zero-emission transport, TVS Motor chairman emeritus Venu Srinivasan said Monday that electric vehicles should not be seen as the single solution to vehicle pollution. The auto industry, he argued, needs to remain "agnostic" on technology and put the consumer at the center of the transition.

Srinivasan made the remarks on the sidelines of the IFQM Symposium 2026, where he also weighed in on India's ethanol-blending program, global manufacturing competition, and the quality gap facing Indian exporters. His views arrive as automakers in India, the United States, Europe and China are pouring billions into electrification while also facing pressure from governments to cut emissions rapidly and from consumers who remain worried about cost, range and charging.

The EV-only story is too narrow, Srinivasan said. "I always believe we have to be agnostic and look at the net effect on the country in terms of pollution, quality and environment. So, EV is not the only solution." That statement does not dismiss EVs, but it places them in a broader toolkit that also includes hybrids, ethanol blends and more efficient internal-combustion engines.

In India, the shape of that toolkit is already visible. Electric three-wheelers are becoming common in dense city streets, and electric scooters have penetrated the two-wheeler market with models like TVS's own iQube line. At the same time, millions of buyers still depend on affordable petrol motorcycles for daily commuting. Policies that force the market toward one technology risk ignoring the diversity of vehicle uses and household budgets.

Srinivasan said EVs should be allowed to "grow organically," with customer choice determining the pace. That is a nuanced position from an industry veteran, but it is also a practical one. In India's mass market, charging networks are concentrated in a few cities, and fast-charging infrastructure remains thin. Until batteries become cheaper and charging easier, demand will be uneven no matter how many mandates are imposed.

Ethanol is another pillar of his argument. India has steadily increased the share of ethanol in petrol as part of its drive to reduce crude oil imports. Srinivasan said the policy is working and the effect on vehicle performance has been small. "The degradation in performance is very marginal. That should not deter us. After all, the whole of Brazil runs on ethanol," he said.

He acknowledged that higher ethanol blends can produce a slight drop in fuel efficiency, but he argued that the issue has been exaggerated. What matters more is the country's import bill and the environmental benefit of using a renewable fuel. Still, he made room for caution at higher concentrations. At E10 there may be no real need to offer separate blends, but at E20 or above, consumers should be able to choose, because ethanol can interact with engine seals and fuel-system materials.

U.S. drivers are familiar with the same trade-off. Most gasoline sold in the United States contains 10% ethanol, and blends of 15% are available in many states. There has been a long-running debate over ethanol's lower energy density and fuel-mileage penalty. Srinivasan's position is straightforward: the penalty is real but small, and it should be balanced against the benefits of reducing petroleum imports and lowering lifecycle emissions.

The second half of his remarks turned to India's manufacturing ambitions. If India wants to increase its share of global manufacturing, companies must meet, not merely match, international quality and productivity standards. "We have to make India synonymous with the word quality," he said.

This is especially true in auto components and two-wheelers, where Indian firms are supplying an increasingly demanding global customer base. Buyers in Europe and North America now expect defect levels close to zero, precise delivery schedules and a transparent carbon footprint. Srinivasan's argument is that India can only climb the value chain if quality becomes a cultural baseline, not just a compliance requirement.

His call for productivity also speaks to competition from China and other low-cost manufacturing hubs. Indian companies cannot compete on labor costs alone. They have to offer a better balance of price, quality and reliability, especially as global supply chains are reshaped by tariffs and geopolitical risks. Business leaders who do not push their suppliers to improve will soon lose orders to companies that do.

Srinivasan's position carries extra weight because TVS Motor is not standing still. The company has expanded its iQube electric scooter lineup, invested in clean mobility and continued to export to Europe and other markets. It is also a major producer of efficient petrol-powered scooters and motorcycles, particularly for emerging markets where electrification is still a decade away. In other words, TVS is itself a demonstration of the technology-agnostic approach he is advocating.

The debate over "technology-neutral" emissions policy is not confined to India. In the United States, California has fought for the right to set its own zero-emission vehicle standards, while federal rules have pushed automakers toward larger shares of electric and hybrid vehicles. Consumers, however, still buy gasoline-powered trucks and SUVs in large numbers. Srinivasan's argument suggests that regulators should focus on emissions outcomes rather than telling manufacturers which engine they must use.

That broader view also lines up with how groups like the International Energy Agency see the energy transition. The IEA's net-zero roadmap includes a wide range of clean energy technologies, not just EVs. Biofuels, efficiency improvements, hybrid drivetrains and hydrogen all have roles to play depending on the market and application. A single magical solution is rare in energy policy.

Where does that leave policymakers? For Srinivasan, the priority is to set clear environmental goals and then allow industries to work out the best path. He supports India's ethanol blending policy because it reduces dependency on imports and cuts lifecycle emissions. He supports electric vehicles because they offer a zero-tailpipe option for cities. But he does not want to penalize manufacturers who continue to improve combustion technology in the meantime.

His final point was about ambition. "We have to meet and exceed international benchmarks in quality and productivity," he repeated. For India to secure a larger share of global manufacturing, its companies will have to be better than competitors who have spent decades perfecting lean production. That means investing in worker training, modern tooling and stricter quality control from suppliers.

Srinivasan's message, in essence, is a plea for balance. Emissions can be cut in more than one way. EV ownership can be encouraged without criminalizing petrol engines. Ethanol can help oil-importing countries without wrecking vehicle performance. And as India pushes for a bigger seat at the global manufacturing table, quality must be a national obsession.

The result, he suggests, will be a cleaner environment, stronger industrial base, and—most importantly—choice for consumers. For a market as diverse as India, or the United States, that may be the most realistic path to a low-carbon future.