Let's just face it. It is – as Al Gore put it – an inconvenient truth: Climate change is happening and there is simply not enough political determination around to get a deal on preventing it. The leading industrial nations and emerging economies – and main emitters of greenhouse gases – China, the United States, Russia and India, not to mention Germany, are not willing to sacrifice the primate of economic growth to protect the climate. That is the depressing conclusion of the Durban conference.

Of course they all have their own arguments: Democracies like the United States, India, Canada and Germany have leaders who fear a public backlash if they adopt unpopular measures climate change skeptics regard as unnecessary. Elections are looming on the horizon for most of them. Autocratic governments like Russia and China also fear public unrest if economic growth rates drop because that could trigger possible challenges to the ruling elites.

But as important as these considerations may be, the future of humankind is at stake. And that is more important than the careers of political leaders. Scientists have been telling us for years now that carbon dioxide emissions are warming the atmosphere, are creating a canopy in the upper atmosphere that keeps the sun's heat in and raises temperatures. If global temperatures rise, as now appears inevitable, by an average of more than six degrees centigrade, considerable areas of the earth will become uninhabitable. Supplies of drinking water will diminish, sea levels will rise, contaminating the soil in coastal areas with salt water, eroding the coast lines, driving people inland. This in turn will cause massive migration. In Bangladesh alone 20 million people are threatened in this way. Where will they go? Will migrations like this cause regional wars? Consequences like these cannot be ruled out especially when one considers that the global population could rise to 9 billion by the end of this century.

The view in India and China is that it is up to the West to solve the problem. After all, they argue, the West has been using the atmosphere as a trash can since the beginnings of industrialization. That is true. But it does not solve the problem because India and China, two emerging superpowers of the 21st century, are now major polluters themselves. In the next decades their carbon dioxide emissions will probably leave those of the old industrial countries behind. As far as they are concerned, economic growth appears for the time being more important than investments in new technologies especially where it is a question of survival. But in reality humankind does not have a choice. It must act. Simply to deny there is an immediate problem is misleading and cynical. Delhi and Beijing must now stand up and take responsibility.

But so must the West. It has not done enough. That must be said very clearly. It is irresponsible for the Americans to refuse any form of legal commitment to reduce greenhouse gases. It is irresponsible for Western countries to refuse to consider more drastic steps. Berlin's decision to phase out nuclear energy means more carbon dioxide emissions, not a reduction. And how long does the Berlin government think it can allow its citizens to drive their cars on the freeways as fast as they want? What kind of signal is that to the world? After all, every way to reduce emissions counts. Germany's saving grace – but it is only a small one – is that it has done much to develop technologies in recent years that reduce the use of fossile fuels, promote renewable energies such as solar and wind power and build low-energy housing. Germany has the Green Party to thank for that. These technologies must now be introduced everywhere as soon as possible. Although this means huge investment, measures like these do create economic growth and jobs. This is an important signal to politicians.

So why is it impossible to get a deal that could help save humankind? Of course the traditional energy sector dominated by the coal and oil industries is working to prevent change – in their own interests. But the real problem is with us. For most ordinary people climate change is too remote. In the West no-one wants to do without his car, his holiday in the sun in distant tourist destinations including air travel. People want a warm house in the winter and exotic food, clothes and flowers imported from distant countries. Our lifestyle has become unsustainable.

Some experts are trying to put a positive spin on the outcome of the Durban conference. That is nothing but self-deception. It is true that the Kyoto protocol was extended. It is true that further negotations are planned. The aim is a binding framework by 2020. But the bottom line is that none of this stops global warming. Every year the world delays will push the cost of climate change up higher and higher. In the end it may be too late to stop the process. And what will our children and our grandchildren say of our generation? It does not bear thinking about.

Author: Grahame Lucas
Editor: Abdullah Al-Farooq