It’s just an economic argument. That will appeal to everybody.”

Magnus Thorsson

Hans Scholl and Magnus Thorsson listened to the four Democrats running for Barrington Town Council during last week’s forum, and said the messages sounded good.

“The candidates offered some encouraging pledges to implement the climate action plan, which I think is good,” said Thorsson. 

But Thorsson has heard pledges before. The former chairman of the Barrington Resilience & Energy Committee recently resigned his post, citing a ‘lack of progress’ on renewable energy efforts in town. More specifically, Thorsson points to the Barrington School Department’s $250 million school construction plans.

“Really, the nail in the coffin was a letter from the school board saying that they had no plans for renewable energy,” Thorsson said. “That was the final straw because it is mathematically impossible for the town achieve its goals if you don’t do something about the school construction.”

At the forum last week, all four Democrat candidates pledged that climate change and resilience would be priorities for them, if elected. One candidate said he would like to incentivize actions residents can take to address climate change, such as removing invasive plants from their property and installing rain barrels and rain gardens.

The candidates also spoke about the cooperative effort needed to address the issue.

“To me, it’s encouraging to hear voices speak clearly for cooperation with the School Committee and the Town Council and the residents and the other committees in town, and put that as a priority,” said Scholl, a current member of the Barrington Resilience & Energy Committee.

“To someone who has not been deeply involved yet, I think it’s a good start. It’s a quarter of a billion dollars at stake and I think we need the joint effort.”

Thorsson agreed.

“I heard people talking about working with the School Committee — absolutely, we need to do that,” Thorsson said. “The School Committee controls 75 percent of the infrastructure in town and a large proportion of the energy use in town. 

“It’s just an economic argument. That will appeal to everybody.”

Scholl added: “Renewable energy costs (over the lifetime of the installation) for the third year now in a row is less expensive than fossil-based. And why do we lock the taxpayers into a technology that is more expensive over the long run?”

Thorsson said incorporating renewable energy sources in the school construction project would have multiple advantages.

“What I heard tonight was our heritage, our values are so enriched by our children’s future. Then why aren’t we making net-zero schools for the future of our children, that combines sustainability and education?” Thorsson said. “We’re missing an opportunity now with a $250 million investment and taxpayers are going to be on the hook… It’s a shame. We’re not giving our children the best value for their future. 

“If we’re thinking about their education, can you imagine the spark they will get from participating in renewable energy and sustainability in schools?”