When the CEO of a large oil company is suggesting that their "Blueprints" global climate change scenarios are preferrable to a mad scramble and competition for access to resources. Called blueprints I assume because the scenarios involve cooperation among nations and planning to manage climate change risks.
The Blueprints scenario is less painful, even if the start is more disorderly. Numerous coalitions emerge to take on the challenges of economic development, energy security, and environmental pollution through cross-border cooperation. Much innovation occurs at the local level, as major cities develop links with industry to reduce local emissions. National governments introduce efficiency standards, taxes, and other policy instruments to improve the environmental performance of buildings, vehicles, and transport fuels.Please note that the final paragraph points out that Royal Dutch Shell does not regularly express preferences when examining possible energy future scenarios. In this case, however, they are indicating a set of planned outcomes that they believe are best for them and their investors.
Shell traditionally uses its scenarios to prepare for the future without expressing a preference for one over another. But, faced with the need to manage climate risk for our investors and our descendants, we believe the Blueprints outcomes provide the best balance between economy, energy, and environment.
Excerpt available at WorldChanging and full text from CEO Jeroen van der Veer is at Royal Dutch Shell.
Mentioned in the comments is that Shell has published some of their previous scenario work. I haven't had a chance to look through these yet, but I'm sure they're interesting.