"It's vital that business acts on the IPCC's warnings."

Guardian: “As the long-awaited IPCC scientific assessment of climate change is unveiled, in its full horror, it is worth remembering that neuroscientists and psychologists tell us we have a very worrying collective tendency for blindness to the kind of risks that can crash economies and imperil civilisations.”
“In this respect, the shocking history of the financial crisis surprises them not a bit. Big Energy is repeating the failing, and not just in their undermining of a stable climate. They are guilty of an enculturated risk blindness that, unless action is taken, will lead to an inevitable global crash.
Since the oil price began its inexorable overall rise in 2004, I have watched captains of the energy and financial incumbencies at work – frequently close to, often behind closed doors – as the financial crisis has played out and the risk-taking has built in energy markets. I have concluded that too many people across the top levels of government and business have closed their eyes and ears to systemic risk-taking.
I see four systemic risks. The first and biggest is no surprise: climate change. We have way more conventional fossil fuel than we need to wreck the climate. Yet the energy incumbency wants us to pile unconventional deposits on the fire. It has been vaguely terrifying to see how people such as the CEOs of Shell and BP get their heads around that one.
Second, we permit Big Energy to puff up a carbon bubble in the capital markets: assuming full burnable value in fossil fuels that in most cases cannot be burned. I am chairman of Carbon Tracker, a financial think tank that aims to align the capital markets with international climate policymaking. Encouragingly, some financial institutions have already begun withdrawing investment in fossil fuels on reading our warnings about this risk. The publication of the IPCC report should fan appreciation of how dysfunctional it is to have energy markets that are allowed to account assets as though climate policymaking does not exist.
Third, we risk surprising ourselves with the so-called shale boom in gas and oil production. That too may prove to be a bubble. This will surprise many people who make judgment calls based on energy-incumbency hype. But I am far from alone in these concerns.
Fourth, we court disaster with our assumptions about oil depletion. Most of us believe the incumbency narrative that there will be adequate flow rates of just-about affordable oil for decades to come. I am in a minority who disbelieve the story.
It would be unwise to forget how few whistleblowers there were in the runup to the financial crash, or how they were vilified then in the same way “peakists” – we believers in premature peak oil – are today.
It is because of the sheer prevalence of risk blindness, overlain with the pervasiveness of oil dependency in modern economies, that I conclude system collapse is probably inevitable. But there is better news. I believe that there can be a road to renaissance, in the rebuilding, and especially so if we make the right decisions in the wake of the IPCC’s latest warnings. We have to nurture clean energy industries and strategies, and accelerate them as though mobilising for war. I do believe that is possible. If we were to do it, we could abate much of the horror that the IPCC warn of in their scientific assessment.
I will be accused of self-interest in saying this: that all I want to do is sell more solar. George Monbiot and Jeremy Paxman are among those who have already levelled that accusation at me. But I set up my solar company precisely because of my fears about fossil fuel dependency, as those who know me appreciate. And those fears have only grown, sadly, in the 13 years of its operation.
We have to kick our fossil-fuel dependency into touch. The IPCC report will provide one opportunity to do it. If that doesn’t work, the next great crisis of capitalism will provide another. There won’t be any more.”