(Editor’s note: This story was updated on Oct. 26.)

When it finally came down to a vote on Oct. 24, the ground-source heat pump (GSHP) option for replacing the library HVAC system went down to defeat. Even though it passed by a majority (193 to 152, or 56% in favor), a two-thirds majority was needed because the measure involved borrowing. 

The geothermal system would have had a net cost to the town of $3.7 million after a state grant and tax incentives were factored in. To meet that amount, town officials proposed that the Community Preservation Committee (CPC) borrow $2.47 million, with another $1.23 million coming from the town’s general fund.

The alternative, which passed by a vote of 224 to 102, was appropriating $330,000 to install a new gas boiler, with the understanding that the town will have to spend a total of $3.24 million over an undetermined period of time to be determined to replace the entire HVAC system, the cost of which was included in the GSHP estimate. Yet to be determined is exactly when  and how the town will need to spend on those separate components once inflation is factored in.

While the GSHP option is more expensive, it is “comprehensive and aligned with the town’s carbon goals,” Finance Committee Chair Paul Blanchfield acknowledged. But he also noted that “funds committed to [CPC] debt service reduce our flexibility to fund future projects without a tax increase and reduce the likelihood of potential tax relief in the future, and we do have future projects,” currently estimated at  $48 million over the next eight years. “The Finance Committee wants residents to make their vote with their eyes open as to what’s coming,” he said.

The committees and officials who studied options for the library determined earlier this year that the best decarbonization option for the library in terms of financial incentives and operational outcomes was a GSHP system. The town received a guaranteed $1 million state grant to help pay for that option, and it could reapply in the future (with no guarantees of approval) for a different set of town projects utilizing non-fossil fuel technologies. 

At Saturday’s meeting, Peter Braun, a member of the Pierce House Committee, said the historic town-owned house “is a climate disaster — it’s a sieve” with insufficient insulation and no air conditioning. “We’d love to be a climate leader; we’d love to see some of these incentives and grants thrown at the Pierce House,” he said. “Why can’t we step back and consider this building for ground-source?”

Sarah Postlethwait objected to what she described as a noncompetitive process in selecting one of the organizations involved in the planning. While PowerOptions (a nonprofit energy buying consortium that helps public entities procure clean energy and infrastructure efficiently) was selected on a competitive basis as the town’s energy manager, that firm in turn did not have a competitive basis for selecting Energy Systems Group to perform detailed technical studies, cost-driven analyses, system design.

ESG is using a competitive process for selecting a well driller and other contractors, Select Board member Jim Hutchinson. “The idea that [the process] is not competitive is not accurate.”

Climate imperative

Several residents spoke fervently in favor of the GSHP proposal. “I trust our leaders to do something about climate change,” said Diana Jong. “Growing up, I watched as our cars got bigger and less efficient, but the green choices were always too expensive… This is exactly how I want out town money spent [to] mitigate the disaster coming our way. I think this is the least we can do to help ourselves.”

“It’s imperative that we reduce our emissions in every way possible as soon as possible,” said Laura Sullivan, a member of the Green Energy Committee. “Climate change isn’t coming any more — it’s here… people in my generation are terrified about what comes next for ourselves and our children. The most impactful climate strategy is widespread effort across the board [and] this is still low-hanging fruit.”

Bob Domnitz worried that the project and its attendant disruption would harm the appearance or health of the grounds or the library itself, which he called an “architectural gem.” But the town’s consulting engineer on the project assured that no harm would be done. Andrew Glass, chair of the Historic District Commission, added that while the group didn’t adopt a formal position, they were “favorably impressed by this plan” as having the “least impact on historical and cultural aspects of the library.”

But others felt that this approach was not the best in terms of the overall goal of “greening” Lincoln. “I’m troubled by the comments that frame this vote as pro or con on decarbonization,” said Paul Shulman. “The difference in reduction of the carbon footprint between the two choices is de minimus when you consider all the carbon contributions in Lincoln. I think the way out of this mess is to fix the immediate problem, which is Article 2, and then refocus on the best possible solutions in town for reducing our carbon footprint. We can spend a little money now to buy the time to make a bigger impact on decarbonization.”

Now that the gas boiler has been approved, the replacement can begin almost right away, saving some money that would have to be spent on temporarily winterizing an unheated building if work had to be done in colder weather, Assistant Town Administrator Dan Pereira said.