As India works towards its Viksit Bharat @2047 vision, the ambition to become a developed economy will depend in part on whether the country can turn its clean energy research into the technologies, manufacturing expertise and industrial capacity needed to power its transition. But along with sits the the Department of Science and Technology’s Research & Development Statistics 2025–26 where India’s gross R&D expenditure at ₹2.45 lakh crore in 2023–24, equivalent to 0.84% of GDP. Private-sector spending contributed 51.8% of the total that year, overtaking the government sector’s 48.2% share.

A study by the Sustainable Futures Collaborative (SFC) and the Climate Policy Lab at Tufts University has mapped 1,359 publicly funded clean energy research, development and demonstration projects across more than 90 institutions between 2019 and 2024. The projects account for approximately ₹1,443 crore in declared funding.

The study found that 81% of the projects focused on improving or adapting technologies already in commercial use, while 67% concentrated on products rather than manufacturing processes. Research into manufacturing processes accounted for about a third of projects but received only a fifth of the declared spending. India’s clean energy industrial policy now focuses on the question on how much public research funding is helping the country develop the capabilities needed to manufacture its own technologies, rather than primarily improving products that already exist?

Solar Manufacturing Exposes the Research Challenge

India’s solar industry illustrates why that question matters. Manufacturing capacity has grown rapidly, but capacity to produce solar modules and the cells inside them has developed at different rates. An analysis by the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) estimated India’s solar module manufacturing capacity at 173 gigawatts, compared with approximately 30 gigawatts of solar cell manufacturing capacity. The difference means that the industry remains dependent on imported cells for a substantial share of its module production.

According to CEEW, around 80% of India’s module manufacturing capacity would depend on imported solar cells, primarily from China, based on the capacities assessed in its study. Solar cells are also a major component of module costs, accounting for nearly 60% of the cost of a solar module, according to the analysis.

This gap illustrates the difference between expanding assembly capacity and developing a more integrated manufacturing supply chain. Domestic cell production requires technological expertise, specialised equipment and the ability to manufacture increasingly efficient cells at competitive costs.

The SFC–Tufts study found that solar photovoltaic research received ₹401 crore, making it the largest individual technology category in the publicly funded research portfolio. That was more than the combined funding allocated to hydrogen, energy efficiency, transport and carbon capture, utilisation and storage.

The concentration of funding in solar does not, by itself, establish that the allocation is misplaced. The research portfolio also covers different stages of technological development. The concern raised by the study is whether the overall balance of funding adequately supports manufacturing capability alongside deployment and product development.

Battery Manufacturing Shows the Cost of Capability Gaps

India’s battery industry faces a related challenge. The government approved a production-linked incentive scheme in 2021 with an outlay of ₹18,100 crore to establish 50 gigawatt-hours of domestic advanced chemistry cell manufacturing capacity.

A February 2026 response by the Ministry of Heavy Industries to Parliament reported that 40 GWh of capacity had been awarded to four beneficiary companies. However, only 1 GWh of manufacturing capacity had been installed under the scheme as of the end of December 2025. The ministry said domestic demand for advanced chemistry cells continued to be met largely through imports.

The ministry identified several implementation challenges, including limited technology availability, shortages of skilled workers, dependence on imported machinery and the lack of upstream components such as cathode and anode active materials and electrolytes.

These constraints help explain why manufacturing ambitions require a supporting research and technology ecosystem. Building a battery factory involves more than securing investment and installing production lines. Manufacturers also need access to cell technologies, materials, specialised equipment and technical expertise.

Small Grants Dominate Public Research Funding

Another problem is that the funding structure is dominated by relatively small grants. Around 68% of the projects received less than ₹50 lakh each, while the median grant size varied little across technology areas, ranging from ₹33 lakh to ₹39 lakh.

The Department of Science and Technology funded just over half of the projects, largely through numerous small grants. The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy supported a smaller number of substantially larger programmes. The 20 institutions with the highest project counts accounted for 68% of all projects.

Small grants can support early-stage research, enable researchers to test ideas and allow institutions to explore different technological approaches. The study does not assess whether individual grants produced useful results or whether their size was appropriate for their objectives.

Its concern is about the combined portfolio. The available public record does not reveal an explicit strategy connecting the distribution of research funding with India’s broader priorities for clean energy deployment, manufacturing and technological leadership.

The researchers therefore raise a question about the purpose of the funding system: should public investment maintain a broad range of exploratory research, or should a greater share be directed towards selected technological capabilities that are important to India’s industrial ambitions?

The answer would influence how research programmes are designed, how funding is distributed and how progress is assessed. Manufacturing-oriented research, for instance, may require different funding scales and longer development periods than projects focused on incremental improvements to existing products.

Clean Energy Research: Wider Strategy for Innovation

India has introduced manufacturing incentives to expand domestic production of solar modules and advanced chemistry cells. These programmes demonstrate that industrial capacity is already a policy priority. The research study examines a different part of the same challenge: whether public research investment is organised to help develop the technologies and production capabilities those industries need.

The distinction matters because manufacturing capacity figures alone do not establish how much technological value is being created domestically. A country can expand final-product manufacturing while remaining dependent on imported cells, components, machinery or materials.

The report calls for greater alignment between clean energy research and India’s manufacturing and deployment ambitions. Such alignment would require a clearer view of which capabilities India already possesses, where critical gaps remain and how public research funding can help address them.

The study also has important limits. It relies on publicly available disclosures, with budget information missing for around 16% of projects and start years missing for 39%. Private-sector research—which the report says accounts for roughly half of India’s national research and development spending—is not captured. Demonstration projects and industry-linked research may also be underrepresented.

The database is therefore a substantial mapping of publicly visible research activity, rather than a complete account of India’s clean energy innovation system or an assessment of the outcomes of individual projects. Its central finding is about coordination. India has set ambitious goals for clean energy deployment and domestic manufacturing, but the public record does not yet show clearly how the country’s research investments add up to a strategy for achieving both.

India will make carmakers meet stricter fuel-efficiency targets from April 2027, as the country tries to contain fuel consumption from a growing passenger-vehicle market. The new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) norms will apply from April 1, 2027, to March 31, 2032. The fleet-average fuel-consumption target will fall from 3.996 litres per 100 km in 2027–28 to 3.3273 litres per 100 km in 2031–32.

That is a 16.7% improvement in the regulatory benchmark over the five-year period. The change matters because India’s demand for road fuel is rising while the country continues to import more than 90% of the crude oil it uses. Cars that consume less fuel can reduce the amount of petrol and diesel needed to keep the growing vehicle fleet on the road.
The new rules also give manufacturers more room to use electric vehicles, hybrids, alternative fuels and other efficiency technologies to meet their targets.

CAFE Norms: Why India Needs to Use Less Fuel

India’s passenger-vehicle market has changed considerably over the past decade. SUVs and larger cars have become more common, while overall vehicle ownership continues to rise. Every additional petrol or diesel vehicle adds to fuel demand. A more fuel-efficient fleet can slow that increase, even when the number of vehicles continues to grow.

The country’s dependence on imported crude makes this particularly relevant. India imports more than 90% of its crude oil, so higher oil consumption also means greater exposure to international oil prices and supply disruptions. The Bureau of Energy Efficiency introduced CAFE standards in 2017 with three objectives: reduce fuel consumption, lower carbon dioxide emissions and reduce dependence on imported oil. The latest notification tightens those requirements for the next five years.

CAFE: Not Same Mileage Target for Every Car

CAFE works differently from a rule that says every vehicle must deliver a particular number of kilometres per litre. It measures the average fuel consumption of a manufacturer’s passenger-vehicle fleet. The calculation takes sales volumes and vehicle weight into account. A company selling fuel-hungry SUVs, for instance, can improve its fleet average by selling more efficient cars, hybrids or electric vehicles.

That gives manufacturers several ways to meet the requirement. They can improve engines and transmissions, reduce energy losses, introduce hybrid systems, sell more EVs or use technologies that receive concessions under the CAFE framework.

What does the 16.7% Improvement Mean?

The 16.7% figure refers to the regulatory fleet benchmark. It does not mean that every new car will use 16.7% less petrol or diesel. Actual fuel consumption depends on the vehicle and how it is driven. Traffic, road conditions, speed, air-conditioning use and driving behaviour all affect mileage. The target applies to the manufacturer’s fleet as a whole.

The new framework also changes the vehicle-weight calculation. The reference weight will rise from 1,082 kg to 1,229 kg. The target curve has been revised so that heavier vehicles face greater efficiency requirements than lighter ones. That change is relevant to India’s passenger-vehicle market, where larger SUVs now account for a substantial share of sales.

Why EVs can Help Manufacturers Meet CAFE Targets

Electric vehicles have a direct advantage under a fuel-economy regulation because they do not consume petrol or diesel.

A manufacturer can therefore improve its fleet-average performance by increasing the share of EVs it sells. Hybrids can also reduce the average fuel consumption of a fleet.

The International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) has examined this relationship in its latest study of India’s vehicle market. Its 2026 analysis finds that stronger fuel-economy standards can support faster EV adoption and reduce oil consumption when the two policies move together. There is some evidence from India’s earlier CAFE rules as well.

An ICCT assessment of CAFE Phase II found that manufacturers relying on conventional efficiency improvements or CNG had difficulty meeting the targets. Manufacturers with significant EV sales, including Tata and MG, were able to meet the requirements with larger margins. The experience shows how a fleet standard can influence the technology choices made by manufacturers.

Stronger Standards Could Reduce Oil Demand

ICCT’s latest study models India’s road-transport oil demand under several policy pathways through 2040. In its business-as-usual scenario, road-transport oil consumption reaches about 197 million tonnes of oil equivalent (Mtoe) in 2040. An alternative scenario combines stronger fuel-efficiency standards with faster EV adoption. Under that pathway, oil consumption is about 146 Mtoe in 2040.

The difference is roughly 51 Mtoe. These are modelled scenarios, not forecasts. They show the scale of the difference that could emerge if India combines tighter efficiency rules with faster electrification. For India, lower oil demand would also reduce the amount of crude that has to be imported to supply road transport.

Technologies Beyond EVs

Electric vehicles are only one part of the new framework. The norms recognise 12 fuel-conservation technologies, compared with four under the earlier framework. These include technologies such as high-efficiency air-conditioning systems, advanced glazing and solar-reflective paints.

Each eligible technology can receive a concession of 1 gram of CO₂ per kilometre, subject to a maximum of 9 grams of CO₂ per kilometre. The framework also includes a Carbon Neutrality Factor for ethanol-blended petrol, biofuels and compressed biogas. This allows manufacturers to use a wider combination of technologies and fuels when working towards their fleet targets.

Super Credits Could Shape How Manufacturers Respond

The rules provide additional regulatory benefits for battery-electric vehicles, range-extended EVs, plug-in hybrids, strong hybrids and flex-fuel vehicles through volume derogation factors and super credits. These mechanisms give low-emission vehicles greater weight in the compliance calculation.

There is a trade-off, however. ICCT’s latest analysis points out that generous super credits can allow manufacturers to meet fleet targets with a relatively small share of EVs while continuing to sell less-efficient combustion-engine vehicles. That makes the treatment of these credits important as EV sales increase.

What Manufacturer Misses the Target?

The rules give companies several ways to manage compliance. Manufacturers can operate within two- or three-year compliance blocks. Credits can be carried forward, traded or exchanged. The Bureau of Energy Efficiency will also operate a buyout mechanism.

The system therefore gives manufacturers some flexibility in how they meet the target. It also means the effect of the regulation may not be visible in a single year’s sales figures.

Will Consumers Notice the Change?

Some changes could be visible in the showroom. Manufacturers may introduce more efficient petrol engines, expand hybrid offerings or increase the number of EVs in their portfolios. Other changes, such as improvements to air-conditioning systems or vehicle design, may be harder for buyers to notice.

The immediate effect on fuel bills is less straightforward. A regulatory improvement of 16.7% cannot be translated directly into a 16.7% saving for a driver. CAFE is calculated across a manufacturer’s fleet, while real-world mileage varies from one vehicle and driver to another. Its effect is likely to appear gradually as new vehicles replace older ones.

CAFE: One Part Larger Transport Shift

Tighter fuel-efficiency standards can reduce the amount of fuel consumed by each vehicle. They do not determine how many vehicles people buy or how much they drive. Public transport, urban planning, vehicle electrification and the availability of alternative fuels will also influence India’s future oil demand.

For the automobile industry, however, the direction is clear. The average efficiency of the vehicles sold in India will have to improve over the next five years. The new CAFE norms give manufacturers several routes to get there. They can make combustion engines more efficient, sell more hybrids and EVs, use recognised fuel-saving technologies or combine these approaches. For India, the reason for tightening the rules is straightforward. More vehicles on the road do not have to mean a matching increase in fuel consumption. The next five years will show how much the industry can narrow that gap.

A wind turbine does not always face the wind squarely. Wind direction changes, turbulence moves through a wind farm and neighbouring turbines disturb the air. Even when a turbine is constantly adjusting its position, there can be an angle between the rotor and the incoming wind. That angle changes how much power the turbine can produce.

Researchers from MIT, Queen’s University, Princeton University and Penn State University have now measured that effect under controlled laboratory conditions. Their experiments found that the blade-tip speed that produces maximum power changes when a turbine is misaligned with the wind. The finding could lead to different control strategies for turbines already operating in wind farms. But the experiment did not test those strategies on a commercial wind farm or demonstrate additional revenue in the field.

The research, published in PNAS Nexus, addresses a problem that has become more important as wind power has expanded. Global installed wind capacity reached 1,299 GW in 2025, after a record 165 GW of new capacity was added during the year, according to the Global Wind Energy Council. The challenge now is partly about getting more useful electricity from that enormous fleet.

Wind Tunnel Behaves More Like the Atmosphere

Wind-farm experiments are difficult to control. Researchers cannot choose the wind speed or direction, and conditions can change before they have isolated the effect they are trying to measure. A conventional wind tunnel creates another problem: a small turbine operating in normal-pressure air does not reproduce all the flow conditions around a much larger turbine.

The researchers addressed this by pressurising the air. They tested a 15-centimetre-diameter turbine at pressures of up to 240 atmospheres. The increased pressure raised air density by roughly 100 to 220 times, allowing the small turbine to reproduce important aspects of the aerodynamics of much larger machines.

The researchers say the setup represented turbines roughly 15 to 20 metres in diameter, with the potential to represent machines up to 35 metres. Over several weeks, the team tested the turbine at different wind-alignment angles and under different control settings. That allowed them to separate two variables that are usually tangled together in a real wind farm: how far the turbine is turned away from the wind and how fast its blades are rotating relative to the wind.

The Outcome of the Experiment

The central finding was not simply that a misaligned turbine can produce more electricity. The experiments showed that the tip-speed ratio for maximum power depends on the turbine’s yaw angle, or how far its rotor is turned away from the incoming wind. That means a turbine operating at an angle to the wind should not necessarily use the same blade-speed setting as a turbine facing the wind directly.

The researchers changed the tip speed while varying the misalignment angle and observed new points of maximum power. They also examined blade pitch and turbine alignment. This matters because many existing approaches to predicting turbine performance assume ideal alignment. The experiments provide physical measurements showing how that assumption breaks down as the angle to the wind increases.

The study also tested a Unified Wind Turbine model developed by MIT researcher Michael Howland. The model predicted how forces and power would change under different combinations of wind misalignment and tip speed. Its predictions agreed with the controlled experimental measurements, providing experimental validation for the model.

The model is computationally lightweight enough to run on a regular laptop, according to the researchers.

What has not been Demonstrated Yet

The researchers estimate that optimising turbine alignment, blade pitch and tip speed could potentially generate tens of thousands of dollars in additional revenue per turbine each year.
It is a modelled economic estimate, not money earned by a turbine during the experiment. The researchers tested a 15-centimetre turbine in a pressurised laboratory; they did not operate a commercial wind farm under the proposed control strategy and measure its annual revenue.

The laboratory experiment therefore establishes the underlying aerodynamic relationship. Whether that relationship can be turned into a sustained increase in electricity generation under real weather conditions remains a field question. Wind farms are much harder environments to control.

In an earlier field experiment, Howland’s team deliberately misaligned turbines for months to study their behaviour. The approach generated useful data, but the researchers had to contend with changing weather and turbulent atmospheric conditions. The pressurised tunnel offers a way to test many combinations of conditions before taking an idea into that environment.

“The big output of the experiments was clearly showing that new power maximums can be achieved when the turbine becomes misaligned with the wind through only changes to the tip speed,” John Kurelek, lead author and assistant professor at Queen’s University, said.

Wind Energy and Its Indian Context

India’s wind fleet provides a substantial real-world setting in which such questions could eventually be tested. The country had 58.52 GW of installed wind power capacity as of August 31, this year, according to the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy. It added 2.43 GW during the first five months of the 2026–27 financial year, taking cumulative capacity above 58 GW.

India has also been one of the major markets driving global wind expansion. GWEC identifies China, the United States and India among the leading countries for new wind capacity additions. That makes turbine performance more than a question of designing the next generation of machines. There is already a large installed fleet whose output depends on how effectively turbines respond to changing wind conditions.

But the MIT findings cannot yet be directly translated into an Indian power-generation figure. India’s turbines operate across different wind regimes, terrain and farm layouts, while the experiment was designed to isolate aerodynamic effects in controlled conditions.

The next step is therefore straightforward: test whether the relationship measured in the laboratory holds when turbines have to deal with the shifting, turbulent conditions of an actual wind farm. If it does, the gain would come from changing how turbines operate rather than rebuilding them. For now, the experiment has established the physics behind that possibility. The commercial benefit remains to be tested.