In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.
Q: 1C – Vital for low-lying island states but virtually impossible 
  
 The Arctic sea ice is already disappearing and, after a 1C global average temperature rise, it would disappear for good in the summer months. Heatwaves and forest fires will become more common in the sub-tropics – worst-hit will be the Mediterranean region, southern Africa, Australia and south-west United States. Most of the world's corals will die, including the Great Barrier Reef. Glaciers that provide crops for 50m people with fresh water begin to melt and 300,000 people are affected every year by climate-related diseases such as malaria and diarrhoea. 
  
 2C – The temperature limit the scientists want 
  
 The heatwaves seen in Europe during 2003, which killed tens of thousands of people, will come back every year with a 2C global average temperature rise. Southern England will regularly see temperatures around 40C in summer. The Amazon turns into desert and grasslands, while increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere make the world's oceans too acidic for remaining coral reefs and thousands of other marine lifeforms. More than 60 million people, mainly in Africa, would be exposed to higher rates of malaria. Agricultural yields around the world will drop and half a billion people will be at greater risk of starvation. The West Antarctic ice sheet collapses, the Greenland ice sheet melts and the world's sea level begins to rise by seven metres over the next few hundred years. Glaciers all over the world will recede, reducing the fresh water supply for major cities including Los Angeles. Coastal flooding affects more than 10 million extra people. A third of the world's species will become extinct as the 2C rise changes their habitats too quickly for them to adapt. 
  
 3C – Looking increasingly likely 
  
 After a 3C global temperature rise, global warming may run out of control and efforts to mitigate it may be in vain. Millions of square kilometres of Amazon rainforest could burn down, releasing carbon from the wood, leaves and soil and thus making the warming even worse, perhaps by another 1.5C. In southern Africa, Australia and the western US, deserts take over. Billions of people are forced to move from their traditional agricultural lands, in search of scarcer food and water. Around 30-50% less water is available in Africa and around the Mediterranean. In the UK, summers of droughts are followed by winter floods. Sea levels rise to engulf small islands and low-lying areas such as Florida, New York and London. The Gulf Stream, which warms the UK all year round, will decline and changes in weather patterns will lead to higher sea levels at the Atlantic coasts. 
  
 4C - Possible with an extremely weak deal 
  
 At this stage, the Arctic permafrost enters the danger zone. The methane and carbon dioxide currently locked in the soils will be released into the atmosphere. At the Arctic itself, the ice cover would disappear permanently, meaning extinction for polar bears and other native species that rely on the presence of ice. Further melting of Antarctic ice sheets would mean a further 5m rise in the sea level, submerging many island nations. Italy, Spain, Greece and Turkey become deserts and mid-Europe reaches desert temperatures of almost 50C in summer. Southern England's summer climate could resemble that of modern southern Morocco. 
  
 5C and above – Highly unlikely nightmare scenario 
  
 With a 5C rise, global average temperatures would be hotter than for 50m years. The Arctic region sees temperatures rise much higher than average – up to 20C – meaning the entire Arctic is now ice-free all year round. Most of the tropics, sub-tropics and even lower mid-latitudes are too hot to be inhabitable. The sea level rise is now sufficiently rapid that coastal cities across the world are largely abandoned. Above 6C, there would be a danger of "runaway warming", perhaps spurred by release of oceanic methane hydrates. Could the surface of the Earth become like Venus, entirely uninhabitable? Human population would be drastically reduced. 
  
 Sources: Mark Lynas, Stern report, Met Office ||||| Climate-Change Limit: 2 Degrees Celsius 
  
 The industrial world has set a goal of preventing the global average temperature from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius, that's 3.6 Fahrenheit, above preindustrial levels. That number will be discussed a lot during the global warming talks in Copenhagen. 
  
 I: 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit. Industrialized countries hope they can limit global warming to that figure. We asked NPR's Richard Harris to look at how scientists arrived at that number in the first place. 
  
 RICHARD HARRIS: In 1992, the nations of the world signed onto a treaty in which they agreed to prevent dangerous interference with the earth's climate. There's no easy way to define dangerous, but scientists like Michael Oppenheimer at Princeton began thinking about how much delicate ecosystems like coral reefs and human systems like agriculture could tolerate. 
  
 MICHAEL OPPENHEIMER: And ultimately, numbers in the range of 2 degrees Celsius began to surface. 
  
 HARRIS: Studies over the years kept coming back to that number. So the European Union decided to adopt 2 degrees as its climate-change limit. Earlier this year, most of the other industrialized countries, including the United States adopted it as well. End of story? Not quite. 
  
 OPPENHEIMER: There's a new concern over the last five years or so with the ice sheets. 
  
 HARRIS: Greenland and Antarctica might start to melt rapidly, even at 2 degrees of warming, pushing sea level up as much as six feet this century and more after that. Also, African delegates in Copenhagen are none too happy with the 2-degree goal. Lumumba Di-Aping from Sudan says if the globe warms 2 degrees on average, Africa would heat up by substantially more. Di-Aping says that would turn Africa into a furnace. 
  
 LUMUMBA DI: Two degrees is a certain death for Africa. 
  
 HARRIS: Richard Harris, NPR News. 
  
 Copyright © 2009 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information. 
  
 NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record. ||||| Greenhouse gas emissions increased by a record amount last year, to the highest carbon output in history, putting hopes of holding global warming to safe levels all but out of reach, according to unpublished estimates from the International Energy Agency. 
  
 The shock rise means the goal of preventing a temperature rise of more than 2 degrees Celsius – which scientists say is the threshold for potentially "dangerous climate change" – is likely to be just "a nice Utopia", according to Fatih Birol, chief economist of the IEA. It also shows the most serious global recession for 80 years has had only a minimal effect on emissions, contrary to some predictions. 
  
 Last year, a record 30.6 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide poured into the atmosphere, mainly from burning fossil fuel – a rise of 1.6Gt on 2009, according to estimates from the IEA regarded as the gold standard for emissions data. 
  
 "I am very worried. This is the worst news on emissions," Birol told the Guardian. "It is becoming extremely challenging to remain below 2 degrees. The prospect is getting bleaker. That is what the numbers say." 
  
 Professor Lord Stern of the London School of Economics, the author of the influential Stern Report into the economics of climate change for the Treasury in 2006, warned that if the pattern continued, the results would be dire. "These figures indicate that [emissions] are now close to being back on a 'business as usual' path. According to the [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's] projections, such a path ... would mean around a 50% chance of a rise in global average temperature of more than 4C by 2100," he said. 
  
 "Such warming would disrupt the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people across the planet, leading to widespread mass migration and conflict. That is a risk any sane person would seek to drastically reduce." 
  
 Birol said disaster could yet be averted, if governments heed the warning. "If we have bold, decisive and urgent action, very soon, we still have a chance of succeeding," he said. 
  
 The IEA has calculated that if the world is to escape the most damaging effects of global warming, annual energy-related emissions should be no more than 32Gt by 2020. If this year's emissions rise by as much as they did in 2010, that limit will be exceeded nine years ahead of schedule, making it all but impossible to hold warming to a manageable degree. 
  
 Emissions from energy fell slightly between 2008 and 2009, from 29.3Gt to 29Gt, due to the financial crisis. A small rise was predicted for 2010 as economies recovered, but the scale of the increase has shocked the IEA. "I was expecting a rebound, but not such a strong one," said Birol, who is widely regarded as one of the world's foremost experts on energy. 
  
 John Sauven, the executive director of Greenpeace UK, said time was running out. "This news should shock the world. Yet even now politicians in each of the great powers are eyeing up extraordinary and risky ways to extract the world's last remaining reserves of fossil fuels – even from under the melting ice of the Arctic. You don't put out a fire with gasoline. It will now be up to us to stop them." 
  
 Most of the rise – about three-quarters – has come from developing countries, as rapidly emerging economies have weathered the financial crisis and the recession that has gripped most of the developed world. 
  
 But he added that, while the emissions data was bad enough news, there were other factors that made it even less likely that the world would meet its greenhouse gas targets. 
  
 • About 80% of the power stations likely to be in use in 2020 are either already built or under construction, the IEA found. Most of these are fossil fuel power stations unlikely to be taken out of service early, so they will continue to pour out carbon – possibly into the mid-century. The emissions from these stations amount to about 11.2Gt, out of a total of 13.7Gt from the electricity sector. These "locked-in" emissions mean savings must be found elsewhere. 
  
 "It means the room for manoeuvre is shrinking," warned Birol. 
  
 • Another factor that suggests emissions will continue their climb is the crisis in the nuclear power industry. Following the tsunami damage at Fukushima, Japan and Germany have called a halt to their reactor programmes, and other countries are reconsidering nuclear power. 
  
 "People may not like nuclear, but it is one of the major technologies for generating electricity without carbon dioxide," said Birol. The gap left by scaling back the world's nuclear ambitions is unlikely to be filled entirely by renewable energy, meaning an increased reliance on fossil fuels. 
  
 • Added to that, the United Nations-led negotiations on a new global treaty on climate change have stalled. "The significance of climate change in international policy debates is much less pronounced than it was a few years ago," said Birol. 
  
 He urged governments to take action urgently. "This should be a wake-up call. A chance [of staying below 2 degrees] would be if we had a legally binding international agreement or major moves on clean energy technologies, energy efficiency and other technologies." 
  
 Governments are to meet next week in Bonn for the next round of the UN talks, but little progress is expected. 
  
 Sir David King, former chief scientific adviser to the UK government, said the global emissions figures showed that the link between rising GDP and rising emissions had not been broken. "The only people who will be surprised by this are people who have not been reading the situation properly," he said. 
  
 Forthcoming research led by Sir David will show the west has only managed to reduce emissions by relying on imports from countries such as China. 
  
 Another telling message from the IEA's estimates is the relatively small effect that the recession – the worst since the 1930s – had on emissions. Initially, the agency had hoped the resulting reduction in emissions could be maintained, helping to give the world a "breathing space" and set countries on a low-carbon path. The new estimates suggest that opportunity may have been missed. |||||
A: 
Greenhouse gas emissions rose by a record amount in 2010, leading to the worst-ever carbon output in history, according to unpublished International Energy Agency estimates. The record rise—which, contrary to some predictions, even the recession couldn’t curb—means that hopes of keeping global warming to a safe level is nearly out of reach, the Guardian reports in an exclusive. The paper had previously reported that in order to prevent potentially “dangerous climate change,” we must keep the global average temperature from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius. But the IEA's chief economist now says that idea is just “a nice Utopia.” The IEA estimates that 30.6 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide entered the atmosphere last year, most of it from burning fossil fuel. That’s a rise of 1.6 gigatonnes over 2009's figure. "I am very worried. This is the worst news on emissions," says the economist for the IEA, which has calculated that annual emissions must remain below 32 gigatonnes annually through 2020 if we're to escape global warming's worst effects. Another expert warns that if the pattern continues, there will be “a 50% chance of a rise in global average temperature of more than 4C by 2100,” which would lead to “widespread mass migration and conflict.” Click to see the latest power duo to fight climate change.