Two weeks ago I got a call from Guy Griswold. He’d received a group email forward with a link to a old news report about the dangers of E15 and wanted some help with replying with some factual information. I sent him some links to helpful stories and reports and, at his request, connected him to the Renewable Fuels Association.

Using what RFA and I provided him, Griswold compiled two emails, asking his friend to retract the email and giving him better information about ethanol and E15. Before I tell you what happened, let me first tell you a little bit about Griswold.

He’s a semi-retired  construction management consultant from South Carolina. Longtime members of the ethanol industry may remember him from his work on a project to build an ethanol plant in North Carolina, which ultimately didn’t become a reality. It was the idea of six investors, including three farmers, a business developer, a petroleum distributor and an engineer. Griswold worked as project manager, construction manager and technical expert from 1987 to 1991, when he stepped down, still hoping the last piece would fall into place. “The preliminary design was complete, the Vogelbush process acceptable, the site selected, local acceptance was good and everything except the loan was there,” he said.

It would have been pretty easy for Griswold to just forget about the anti-E15 email. He could have assumed that any response would either A. be ignored or B. end up igniting an unproductive argument. He might have thought, eh, this isn’t my problem.

But he didn’t. He said he wanted to get involved because he recognizes the benefits of ethanol, including benefiting farmers, reducing dependence on foreign oil and reducing vehicle emissions. Responding to the email was an opportunity to correct misinformation about E15 and the ethanol industry. “I know firsthand how the gas industry, the car manufactures and other anti-ethanol groups are trying to adversely affect and kill the industry,” he said. “The American public does not truly understand the value of the product and can be easily swayed by anti-ethanol propaganda.”

So what happened? The person that forwarded on the email responded this way.  “I will forward this info to those that I sent my original email.” It doesn’t indicate that the information Griswold sent changed his mind about E15 but it does show a willingness to listen. I think that’s a good start!

Sometimes responding to ethanol critics can feel pretty overwhelming. There’s so much misinformation out there and some people just aren’t interested in hearing anything but the sound of their own voices, reciting their own firmly held beliefs. But, as Griswold’s example shows, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try.

Meet somebody on a trip that is anti-ethanol? Tell them the other side. Have a friend that blasts misinformation across social media? Respond with an appropriate link. Bump into a shirttail relative that thinks ethanol is the devil? Calmly provide some facts. Read something negative or wrong in your local newspaper? Take the time to email the writer, send a letter to the editor or even invite a reporter out to the ethanol plant to take a tour.

Personally, I don’t enjoy debating controversial issues, especially when I can tell the conversation isn’t going anywhere helpful. But I have calmly stated my opinions about the benefits of the ethanol industry at a craft fair, around picnic tables, at church, after a few funerals and in airport or two. I don’t know if my words changed any minds but perhaps I gave them some food for thought.

Just like Griswold did. And just like I know many of you are already doing. Keep up the good fight!