How Does Nimby Not In My Backyard Affect Renewable Projects?

Summer nights that stick to your skin deserve drinks that are equal parts seductive and refreshing. I lean into contrast: something bright and citrusy early in the evening, a bubbly spritz as people settle in, and a smoky or spicy option for when the night deepens. My go-to trio for a sultry backyard party? A Paloma with fresh grapefruit and a salted rim for instant backyard-cool vibes; a basil or mint Mojito that I muddle lightly so the mint sings but doesn’t overpower; and a mezcal-based cocktail—think a Mezcal Margarita or a smoky 'Oaxacan Old Fashioned'—to add that slow-burn intimacy as the temperature drops. I like to give exact, simple ratios so friends can DIY at a drink station. For a Paloma: 1.5 oz tequila, 1 oz grapefruit juice, 0.5 oz lime, a splash of simple syrup if the grapefruit is bitter, topped with club soda and a pinch of flaky salt. For a Mojito (single): 10 mint leaves, 0.75 oz lime, 0.5 oz simple syrup, 1.5 oz light rum, crushed ice, top with soda—don’t over-muddle the mint or it tastes grassy. For a smoky option: 1.5 oz mezcal, 0.75 oz lime, 0.5 oz agave, optional 0.25 oz Aperol for balance. Throw in a jalapeño slice for guests who like heat. I always bring a pitcher of a low-ABV option too—Pimm’s Cup with cucumber, orange, mint, and ginger ale is a perennial favorite and keeps the party mellow for drivers or early evenings. Presentation and logistics are half the magic. Use large blocks of ice or frozen fruit to keep pitchers from watering down; label each pitcher with cute tags for allergens or spice level; offer salt, sugar, smoked salt rims, and herb sprigs for garnish. Add a mocktail like hibiscus cooler (hibiscus tea, lime, a touch of honey, club soda) for non-drinkers. Lighting, a little cooling spray fan, and citrus-scented candles keep things sultry without being sticky. Watching people take that first sip of a perfectly chilled Paloma—priceless, and it always feels like summer in full swing.

The Comfort of Crows: A Backyard Year' isn't something I've stumbled upon as a free novel, at least not in any legal or official capacity. From what I've gathered, it's a beautifully written nature memoir, and those kinds of works usually aren't just floating around for free—publishers and authors tend to keep them under lock and key unless they're part of a promotion or a library loan. I remember hunting for free copies of similar books once, only to realize that supporting the author by buying or borrowing it properly is the way to go. The joy of holding a physical copy or even a legit ebook feels more rewarding anyway. If you're really keen on reading it without spending, I'd recommend checking your local library or apps like Libby. Sometimes, libraries have digital copies you can borrow, and that's a win-win—you get to read it legally, and the author still gets support through library sales. Plus, there's something special about reading a book like this, where the author pours their heart into observing nature, in a format that feels right. Pirated copies just don't do justice to the effort behind such works.

Growing up in a neighborhood where everyone knows everyone, I've watched NIMBY fights pop up like dandelions—everywhere and annoyingly persistent. A classic example is affordable housing: people will nod and say housing is a crisis, then block a proposed low-income development two streets over because they worry about property values, traffic, or “character of the neighborhood.” I've seen petitions, glossy mailers and public hearings filled with well-rehearsed talking points that all translate to 'not here'. Another big category is services for people experiencing homelessness or addiction. Day centers, shelters, syringe-exchange clinics and sober-living homes often get the fiercest pushback. Folks will support services in principle, then mobilize when a shelter is proposed for their neighborhood. The tactics are similar—legal challenges, appeals to zoning, and emotional testimony about safety and kids. It’s frustrating because the same communities sometimes oppose transit stops and bike lanes while driving long commutes that contribute to the problem. I've also seen fights over infrastructure and industry: wind turbines and solar farms being blocked for 'views', cell towers rejected because someone doesn't want a mast in sight, and recycling or composting centers opposed over smell and traffic. Schools, daycares, group homes for disabled people, halfway houses, refugee resettlement sites and even hospice facilities can trigger NIMBY pushes. Sometimes it's coded language—'traffic' or 'crime'—and sometimes it's pure fear. When I go to town hall meetings I try to ask clarifying questions and push for community benefits and better design instead of reflexive opposition. If communities discussed trade-offs honestly, a lot of these disputes would be less ugly and more solvable.

I recently stumbled upon 'The Comfort of Crows: A Backyard Year' while browsing for nature-inspired reads, and it quickly became one of my favorites. The way the author captures the subtle shifts of seasons in a single backyard is downright magical. As for finding it in PDF, I’ve checked a few places—official publishers, digital libraries, and even some indie bookstores—but it’s tricky. The book’s relatively new, and publishers often prioritize physical or e-reader formats first. I’d recommend keeping an eye on sites like the author’s official page or platforms like Bookshop.org, which sometimes offer digital versions later. If you’re into audiobooks, that might be another route; the narration could really bring those backyard scenes to life. Honestly, part of me hopes it stays hard to find as a PDF because flipping through the physical copy feels like part of the experience. The illustrations and layout are so thoughtful—losing that to a plain PDF would be a shame. Maybe try borrowing it from a local library? Some even lend e-books via apps like Libby. Either way, it’s worth the wait or extra effort—this book’s like a warm cup of tea for the soul.

Margaret Renkl's 'The Comfort of Crows: A Backyard Year' feels like a quiet conversation with an old friend who notices everything. Her observations about nature in her own backyard aren’t just pretty descriptions—they’re layered with this deep, almost aching awareness of how fragile life is. The way she ties the cycles of the natural world to human emotions makes it impossible not to reflect on your own place in things. It’s not preachy; it’s gentle, but it sticks with you. What really hooks people, I think, is how accessible it is. You don’t need to be a birdwatcher or a poet to 'get' it. Renkl writes in a way that feels like she’s sitting across from you, pointing out the cardinal in the bushes while casually dropping wisdom about grief, joy, and resilience. In a world that’s always shouting, her book is a rare space where you can just breathe and notice the small, beautiful things.

I live in a neighborhood where every public meeting turns into a slow-motion battle about the next development, so I've thought a lot about how 'not in my backyard' attitudes actually affect prices. On the surface it's intuitive: when neighbors successfully block apartments, duplexes, or smaller townhouses, they stop new homes from being built. That reduced supply, with demand still climbing, pushes prices up. I’ve watched for-sale signs sit longer in areas that allowed gentle densification, while places that fiercely resisted change seemed to keep property values high — partly because scarcity becomes a selling point. But the story isn't only supply and demand. There are second-order effects: exclusionary zoning can turn a neighborhood into a premium enclave, with better-funded schools and nicer streets because the tax base is stable but small. That boosts desirability and attracts buyers who can pay more, further inflating prices. At the same time, blocking multifamily housing tends to push less-affluent people farther away, increasing commute times and regional inequality. I've been to planning workshops where people argued that density would ruin character, but often 'character' is used to justify keeping prices out of reach. If you live in or near an area with a lot of nimby pushback, expect local housing to be more expensive in the long run — and don't be surprised if nearby neighborhoods end up bearing the burden of housing for lower-income households. Personally, I wish more communities tried small-scale compromises like accessory units or design standards that preserve aesthetics without killing supply. That kind of middle road keeps neighborhoods lively and a little less hostile to younger families and renters who might otherwise never get a foot in the door.

I still get a kick out of tracing everyday phrases back to their roots, and 'Not In My Back Yard'—or the snappier 'NIMBY'—is a great one to unpack. The actual acronym is relatively modern: lexicographers and newspaper archives usually point to around 1980 for the first widespread printed uses of 'NIMBY.' That’s when journalists and politicians started using the three-letter shorthand to describe local opposition to things like waste dumps, power plants, or social services being built near people’s homes. But the idea itself is way older than the acronym. If you squint back through history you see the same pattern: neighbors resisting prisons, asylum placements, industrial smokestacks, even cemeteries. In Victorian times, for instance, communities fought putting noxious industries or pauper housing next to nicer neighborhoods. The pattern shows up in rural-urban conflicts, early environmental battles, and the way urban planning played out across class lines. What fascinates me is how the term became a political cudgel in the late 20th century. By the 1980s it was shorthand for a particular kind of civic NIMBYism—people supporting general policies in principle but opposing specific local implementations. Over time it hooked into debates about environmental justice, zoning, and later housing shortages and renewable projects. I see it every time a community protests a new shelter or a wind farm—the same tension between local quality of life and broader societal needs. Personally, I try to keep that history in mind when I leaflet my neighborhood; knowing the roots helps me listen a little better to why people push back.

I get fired up talking about this stuff—there are some classic wins where communities actually flipped NIMBY into a ‘let’s build this together’ vibe. One of my favorite examples is the Middelgrunden offshore wind cooperative outside Copenhagen: local residents owned a big share of the project, which turned opponents into investors and gave people a direct financial stake in the turbines. Similarly, the Danish island of Samsø became a poster child for community-led renewables; they organized workshops, offered tours, and made tangible local economic benefits obvious from day one. Another story I keep coming back to is Vancouver’s supervised injection site, Insite. It weathered fierce political opposition but survived because of rigorous data, local healthcare champions, and legal support that emphasized public health outcomes. Back in the U.S., Portland’s Dignity Village shows how turning a contentious homeless encampment into a semi-formal community with rules, leadership, and incremental legitimacy helped defuse NIMBY pressure. And community land trusts—like the Champlain Housing Trust—have quietly opened doors for affordable housing projects by keeping development locally controlled and addressing fears about lost property values. What ties these wins together is a toolbox: community ownership or direct benefit, early and honest engagement, pilot projects to prove impact, strong local champions, and crisp data that addresses the scariest questions. I’ve sat through too many town halls to count, and when people can see what they get—jobs, reduced bills, safer streets—it’s surprising how quickly “not here” can turn into “how soon?”