The response wasn't limited to politicians. Voices from business, industry and investors all rallied behind the Paris Accord and its goal of holding global warming to well below 2° celsius. President Donald Trump followed through with his pledge to leave the Paris accord. Credit:AP Such widespread support for the Paris Accord is welcome, and helps marginalise the Trump administration. But many businesses and investors are guilty of a much subtler, but no less damaging, form of denial. The most obvious example is possibly Incitec Pivot. Incitec is part of the Industrial Energy Consumers of America, which lobbied the Trump administration to pull out of Paris. As a listed company, Incitec Pivot is owned by Australian investors, and in all likelihood by you and I through our super funds.

Most major investors ostensibly support the Paris goals and will happily join the anti-Trump chorus. But when it comes to holding the companies they own to account, they are more often than not missing in action. Many businesses are guilty of a much subtler, but no less damaging, form of denial. Credit:AP Last month was a case in point. Santos is on the record as a supporter of the Paris Agreement and its goals. Investors had the chance to vote for a resolution that would have mandated Santos conduct a 2ºC scenario analysis (and full disclosure here, Market Forces coordinated the resolution). But many chose to vote against the resolution, satisfied that Santos was doing enough on climate change disclosure, even though the company's future prospects remain predicated on exploring for more gas, and selling it to an endlessly expanding market. Santos is on the record as a supporter of the Paris Agreement, but fail to back it up with their actions. Credit:David Mariuz

Those investors, including many of our super funds, will have stakes in Downer EDI, Aurizon, Commonwealth Bank, AMP, QBE and many of the other companies supporting Adani at the moment as the Indian mining and energy company seeks to build the world's biggest thermal coal export mine in the midst of a climate crisis. What, exactly, are they doing to manage that exposure and the risk that their capital could be caught up in an economic, environmental and climate disaster like the Carmichael mine? BHP boss Andrew Mackenzie said last week he lobbied Trump to keep the US in Paris Credit:Carla Gottgens Many businesses and investors are guilty of a much subtler, but no less damaging, form of denial. In an economy dominated by the finance sector, will we see investors giving the Australian government a dressing down over proposals to use the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to fund new coal projects at the expense of creating opportunities to invest in renewables?

Where might the owners of our economy be on the matter of lending Adani $1 billion that could have gone into a wealth of sustainable, long-term job creation and investment opportunities for northern Australia? BHP Billiton's Andrew Mackenzie said last week he lobbied Trump to keep the US in the Paris agreement, telling him "it is possible to be pro-coal but also to stay in the Paris Agreement". While that may have kept Trump's attention for the requisite two minutes, it is symptomatic of a problem we see from businesses and politicians alike. Believing that we can meet the Paris Agreement's goals without major structural change to how we produce and use energy is nothing more than a comforting delusion. Being pro-coal while meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement means providing the re-training and new industrial and employment opportunities that coal communities need and deserve.

Criticising Trump over Paris is right. But it is also easy. And it certainly won't pass for a transition plan. If investors want to be taken seriously when they criticise climate change laggards they need to demonstrate they're also putting in the hard yards, forcing companies and projects to adapt to the low-carbon economy or be left behind.