ESG is a deeply problematic concept but a world without any "esg" concerns at all is a terminal world with an expiry date fairly close. So the positive attitude is to see the glass as 5% full rather than 95% empty and see what could be the next step.
Unbundling the acronyms is the obvious first concern. They smack of a kitchen sink approach to everything the corporate thinks is a reputation risk. As factors they have no internal coherence.
Then, for each of the underlying issues one must clarify and distinguish whether it is an assessment of current state of the world or future risks (and to whom, what? earnings, value, reputation, clients, mother earth etc).
Finally, even in the most tractable case (accounting for current co2 emissions, which is a tiny fraction of environmental footprint and says nothing about the future) there is a mountain of methodological challenges to climb: Who is emitting, who is enabling it, who is demanding it, who benefits most etc. The modern economy is a giant hairball of dependencies yet we like to ignore all that.
The "ESG period" of the sustainability transition is the financial system taking a first peek at the actual state of the world as opposed to "the number goes up". Its no surprise that many just want to close the lid and pretend they never saw anything. But its not possible unless we accept we are an amoral last generation that devolves into a madhouse.
It took credit ratings a century to mature and they are still heavily gamed / leading to systemic crises. What makes you think this existential question for the unhinged corporate profit-focused entities that dominate modern economic life will get resolved any sooner?
There is a long, long road ahead. But if you look for purpose look no further.