The Paris Agreement adopted by 195 nations at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC in December 2015 included the aim of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change by "holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre- industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels". Even 1.5°C comes with serious consequences.
It will be one of the main items discussed at a global conference in Poland in December, when governments will review the Paris Agreement (which the United States withdrew from in June 2017).
In addition, insects and plants will be almost twice as likely to lose half of their habitat if global temperatures rose by 2°C as compared to if they went up by 1.5°C.
Warming of 2C above pre-industrial levels had widely been thought of as the threshold beyond which unsafe climate change will occur, but vulnerable countries such as low-lying island states warn rises above 1.5C will threaten their survival.
By 2050, humanity would need to cut its net emissions to zero.
US President Donald Trump has questioned the science of manmade climate change and vowed to withdraw the US, the world's second largest emitter of greenhouse gases after China, from the agreement.
But that's not even the weirdest part of Gore's most recent overture to the public, begging them to make climate change a priority in upcoming elections.
If emissions can't be cut to a sufficient degree, researchers will need to devise effective methods of removing Carbon dioxide from the air, such as devoting land to growing trees and biofuel crops, Erik Solheim, executive director of the UN Environment Program, tells The Washington Post. But IPCC also adds that the effectiveness of CO2-capturing technologies is still unproven on a large-scale.
It was written by 91 authors from 40 countries and approved by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on Saturday.
These effects include extreme heatwaves, severe droughts, the death of coral reefs, mass extinctions, sea-level rise, and more. With a 2°C rise, the impacts can be too serious for communities to adapt.
Tropical nations most affected by climate asked the UN to create a report showing the difference in impact between a 1.5 degree Celcius (2.7 degrees F) and a 2.0 C (3.6 degree F) increase.
Another recent report from the consulting firm PwC makes it clear that even limiting warming to 2 degrees C will be a stretch: "There seems to be nearly zero chance of limiting warming to well below two degrees (the main goal of the Paris Agreement), though widespread use of carbon capture and storage technologies, including Natural Climate Solutions, may make this possible", it says.
So how can we make sure that warming does not exceed 1.5°C and take us into highly risky territory?
Presumably, the United Nations report will build support for firms such as Vestas and other companies in the business of reducing climate change-likely to be a growth industry for years. We ask that any comments by climate-change denialists be flagged for moderation. "In fact, [they could provide] two to six times more [than carbon cuts]".
Limiting the increase to 1.5 degrees would also have a dramatic impact on economic growth and development in poorer countries, which could reduce the number of people both exposed to climate-related risks and susceptible to poverty by several hundred million by 2050, it said.
Areas like sub-Saharan Africa and the Mediterranean would still suffer from droughts, but farms would be able to grow more food than they could with 2 degrees of warming.
Rajeevan says India is already experiencing extreme weather events; the unprecedented rains that triggered this year's Kerala floods being an example.
Experts on climate change released a new report Monday saying widespread action across the globe is needed to prevent long-lasting and irreversible damage caused by global warming. Any additional emissions would require the removal of Carbon dioxide from the air.