Why in news?
Union New and Renewable Energy Minister Pralhad Joshi promoted agrivoltaics at the world conference on the subject in New Delhi on 21 October 2026. Agrivoltaics combines solar electricity generation with continued agricultural use of the same land, rather than replacing the farm with a conventional solar park. Citing The Energy and Resources Institute, Joshi said using 10% of suitable land could meet India's projected 2050 electricity needs. That is a reported potential claim, not electricity already being generated. The government is also preparing a policy approach linked to the next phase of its agricultural solar programme. The attraction is to reduce competition between food production and energy infrastructure while creating another possible source of farm income. Whether that works depends on crops, system design, costs and the ability to sell or use the power. The study's land assumptions also need to be distinguished from the headline percentage.
Two uses must genuinely share the site
A photovoltaic panel converts sunlight into electricity. In agrivoltaics, the installation is arranged so that agricultural production can continue beneath or between the panels. This may involve growing crops, maintaining suitable grazing or other agricultural activities, depending on the design. A solar array beside a separate farm does not automatically achieve that shared use. Nor does calling an installation agricultural prove that it preserves meaningful production. The arrangement has to leave enough usable space, light and access for the farming activity it is intended to support.
Designs can raise panels, widen the spaces between rows or adapt the arrangement to the particular crop and equipment. These choices involve trade-offs. Taller structures can improve access but require more supporting material and suitable foundations. Wider spacing allows more light to reach crops and more room for work, but can reduce electricity output per unit of land. The useful design is therefore not necessarily the one that packs the largest number of panels into a field. It must serve both forms of production.
What the published land scenario actually says
A July report by the Energy Transitions Commission and The Energy and Resources Institute, or TERI, starts with 160 million hectares of cropland. Its geographical screening identifies 47.5 million hectares as technically suitable. A high-potential deployment scenario uses around 16.2 million hectares and estimates 12,775 terawatt-hours of annual electricity. That scenario applies illustrative uptake assumptions to different crop-suitability groups. The report compares the result with projected 2050 demand of 5,250–10,020 terawatt-hours. It is a model of potential, not an allocation of land or a record of operating plants.
Here, approximately 16 million hectares is about 10% of all 160 million hectares, not 10% of the 47.5-million-hectare suitable area. The latter would be 4.75 million hectares. Those are different land bases. The minister's reported percentage and the report's particular high-potential scenario should therefore not be treated as an identical calculation. The study's large generation estimate cannot simply be attached to the smaller area without another calculation and its assumptions.
The output calculation assumes approximately 0.5 megawatts per hectare and an average capacity factor of 18%. Capacity factor expresses generation as a share of continuous full-rated output over a period. It is not the efficiency with which a panel converts sunlight. Installed capacity measures generating capability, while terawatt-hours measure electricity produced over time. Keeping those quantities separate is essential when comparing a proposed solar system with a country's annual electricity demand.
Shade can help a crop—or take away needed light
Panels change the conditions experienced by plants below them. Partial shade can reduce direct heating and water loss in a hot environment. It can also remove some of the sunlight that plants use for growth. The outcome depends on the crop, climate, season and pattern of shade, rather than the presence of panels alone. A crop that benefits from relief during severe heat may respond differently under cooler or less sunny conditions. That is why local growing trials matter before a particular crop–panel arrangement is promoted widely.
A University of Arizona account of a 2019 dryland field study illustrates the need for specific comparisons. Researchers tested chiltepin peppers, jalapeños and cherry tomatoes beneath panels and in an open planting area, using equal irrigation rates. Chiltepins and tomatoes produced more fruit under the panels, while jalapeño fruit production was similar between treatments. The team also examined temperature, moisture and plant water loss. These findings support the possibility of useful interactions under those study conditions. They do not establish one water-saving percentage or yield increase for every Indian crop.
Indian experiments are older than the new policy discussion
Agrivoltaics is not being invented for the first time at the 2026 conference. An earlier example comes from the Indian Council of Agricultural Research's Central Arid Zone Research Institute in Jodhpur, Rajasthan. Its 105-kilowatt experimental system was inaugurated on 12 August 2017. The arrangement provided spaces for crops between panels and for collecting rainwater from the panels. That earlier installation shows why local research includes both agricultural working space and water management. Its inauguration announcement is not evidence that the same crop performance or financial return applies to every later project.
Annual potential is not round-the-clock electricity
A farm's solar equipment also needs more than panels. An inverter converts the direct-current electricity generated by the modules into alternating current used by most appliances and the grid. Mounting structures, connections and other equipment must work as a complete system. Batteries can store energy for later use when sunlight is unavailable, but storage is not automatically included simply because a project is agrivoltaic. Producing enough electricity in annual arithmetic does not establish that demand can be met at every hour.
This makes grid integration a different question from land availability. A technically suitable field still needs an appropriate connection if electricity is to be exported. The timing of generation must be reconciled with when consumers need power, using the wider power system and, where appropriate, storage. Agricultural compatibility, electrical infrastructure and reliable commercial arrangements are separate tests. Passing a geographical screening does not by itself satisfy all three. A national resource estimate is useful for planning, but it is not a ready-to-operate project on every identified hectare.
What the proposed policy must settle for farmers
Joshi said the next phase of the Pradhan Mantri Kisan Urja Suraksha evam Utthaan Mahabhiyan, or PM-KUSUM, would include an agrivoltaics programme. The existing agricultural solar scheme supports uses such as solar pumps and decentralised electricity generation. The announcement signals a proposed direction; it does not itself specify a final subsidy or make every farm eligible. Joshi also said elevated installations could cost 25–30% more than conventional ground-mounted solar. That attributed comparison describes a challenge to address, not a fixed extra cost for every design.
At the conference, Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan called for designs that preserve cultivation, crop choice and access for machinery. He also emphasised drainage, equipment maintenance, dependable electricity purchase and timely payment. The reported policy discussion includes disputes, leasing and restoring land if a farmer exits. These details determine whether an extra income stream remains compatible with farming over the project's life. A promising generation estimate cannot replace clear responsibilities when equipment fails, payments are delayed or an operator leaves a project.
Conclusion
Agrivoltaics offers a way to use farmland for food and electricity together, but the two activities must remain workable in practice. The scale of India's potential deserves attention, alongside the exact land base and assumptions behind each estimate. Local crop performance, affordable structures, grid access and enforceable commercial responsibilities will determine what can actually be built. The next policy stage needs to turn a broad opportunity into arrangements that farmers can understand, use and leave without losing their livelihood.