In the field of psychology, the common "flight or fight" mode is regularly investigated.

However, the global warming crisis has created two similar modes. On one side of the coin, a view that climate change is extremely urgent and easy to address. The other, one of denialism, with a view that acting on climate change is not urgent and also not easy to address.

Both sides have fallen foul of fake news and propaganda. Left wing news outlet The Guardian changed its terminology surrounding climate change to "global heating" while News Corp has been repeatedly criticised for climate change denialism. 

This polarisation has played out across Australia between political factions and a lack of energy policy for more than a decade.

However, a fresh sentiment gives rise to hope, according to Frazer-Nash consultant Ben Heard.

This sentiment of reality, with an understanding that climate change mitigation is urgent, albeit also very hard to achieve and something that will take strategic planning and then implementation.

Industry knows it is not business as usual. This much is apparent by resounding environmental, social and governance measures and commitments to reach net zero emissions across the mining sector.

Speaking at the Minerals Week conference hosted by the Minerals Council of Australia, Heard said the climate change conversation that had been marred by politics for decades, was entering a new era.

"There is a new sentiment emerging," he said.

"A sentiment that rightly says, yes, climate change is an extremely urgent and important issue, but takes a realistic perspective."

He said this third sentiment was most prominent among business leaders, which understood that scale of climate change mitigation could not be underestimated.

Heard noted Increasing renewable generation and hydrogen was not the entire problem solver.

"The challenge is serious, but it's also going to be extremely hard to address," he said.

"Firstly, we need to lay significant building blocks in order to prospect in a generation's time."

Heard suggested that while he was in favour of targets, he was not in favour of using deadlines.

"There is no finish line in reaching net zero," he said.

"If we hurry to an inferior basket of attempted solutions using deadlines, it could be a global catastrophe."

He also said the use of the label "emergency" had done more damage to the discourse around how to solve global warming.

"The term emergency is fatiguing, and industry never mind the general public cannot maintain the psychological burden of this label."

He suggested finding replacements such as "urgency" instead.