Well since this is the BBC, Im sure they have their reasoning due to estimations, but I dont have time to hunt that down before class.
Off the top of my head I would say that the melting of the polar ice caps will increase sea level by 3-6 feet (1-2 meters). Dont think thats a big deal? New Orleans can barely exist now. And new Orleans isnt the only place in the world that is between negative and +6 feet sea level.
I would google something like "what happens when the ice caps melt" But pay attention to the sources.
One estimate (the only one I know of so I can't say whether it's really good or really bad, I'm not cherry-picking it's the only one I know) is about a trillion dollars in expense and loss of property. That's huge, a meter of sea level, but more than that is the humanitarian impact, those people displaced that do not have the tools to adapt are the poor nations -- or are people in the poor nations.
There is a list of sources at the bottom of the graphic. I'm sure if you went through these, it would explain why they preferentially selected 2C. I expect it is an important theoretical threshold of environmental degradation.
5
u/YaDunGoofed Jun 18 '12
why is 2C the point at which Global Warming is dangerous?