@kerrand.bsky.social
Communications, campaigns, photos.
You have the right to remain salient.
You have the right to remain salient.
Wouldn't 20 April be more appropriate?
October 6, 2025 at 11:10 AM
Wouldn't 20 April be more appropriate?
"...in 2006. At the time, most environmental organisations were talking about climate change as a problem for the future".
Utter crap! From the early 1990s, Greenpeace highlighted the (then-present) dangers of climate change. From '95, WWF's international campaign had a similar focus on impacts.
Utter crap! From the early 1990s, Greenpeace highlighted the (then-present) dangers of climate change. From '95, WWF's international campaign had a similar focus on impacts.
October 3, 2025 at 6:36 PM
"...in 2006. At the time, most environmental organisations were talking about climate change as a problem for the future".
Utter crap! From the early 1990s, Greenpeace highlighted the (then-present) dangers of climate change. From '95, WWF's international campaign had a similar focus on impacts.
Utter crap! From the early 1990s, Greenpeace highlighted the (then-present) dangers of climate change. From '95, WWF's international campaign had a similar focus on impacts.
No problem. Australia's hoping to have a couple of nuclear-powered submarines in the early 2040s.🙄
January 23, 2025 at 5:37 PM
No problem. Australia's hoping to have a couple of nuclear-powered submarines in the early 2040s.🙄
Can't understand why they didn't just opt for a lollypop stick with a marshmallow stuck on either end.
January 23, 2025 at 5:28 PM
Can't understand why they didn't just opt for a lollypop stick with a marshmallow stuck on either end.
'meet', not 'meet with'
January 21, 2025 at 9:26 PM
'meet', not 'meet with'
So is Farage fisting Musk, or is it the other way round?🤔
December 18, 2024 at 12:22 PM
So is Farage fisting Musk, or is it the other way round?🤔
What a joke when, at the behest of the fossil fuel industry, they're spaffing £22 bn on useless 'carbon capture'. And in favour of *hugely* expensive new nuclear power that won't operate for decades, and create yet more radioactive waste.
December 13, 2024 at 6:17 PM
What a joke when, at the behest of the fossil fuel industry, they're spaffing £22 bn on useless 'carbon capture'. And in favour of *hugely* expensive new nuclear power that won't operate for decades, and create yet more radioactive waste.