The problem with climate change warnings is that the numbers are small and projected well into the future. The time being is all the matters politically, at least to some governments, and so we continue to muddle along with half-baked measures that scare the bejeezus out of scientists.
In October 2018, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change looked at the difference between a world that had warmed by 2 C and one that warmed by 1.5 C, the current target.
The findings were dramatic with increased risks to "health, livelihoods, food security, water supply, human security, and economic growth." Millions of people could face poverty, flooding and drought if the planet warmed by 2 C.
Now we have another UN report that commands our attention. Without drastic action, our planet is headed toward warming of 3.2 C in less than 100 years, an outcome one participant calls “stupefying.” The United Nations Environment Program calls on governments to act immediately, within the next decade, to limit global warming to 1.5 C or 2 C at most by 2100.
Gabriel Filippelli, a professor at Purdue, said that the difference between 2 C and 3.2 C warming may seem minor, but that's not the case. "It seems mathematically like we're playing around with numbers, but they are profound numbers," Filippelli said. Each fraction of a degree the planet warms means dire consequences, particularly in countries most vulnerable. Canada’s North Pole region is warming much faster than the rest of the country resulting in that “polar vortex” that pokes down the jet stream spilling Arctic air across the central provinces.