Americans don't get the
metric system. When you're trying to point out to an American audience how dire the consequences of human-caused global warming are, please use terms that Americans understand viscerally.
3.6 °F is, roughly speaking, the international consensus for the likely amount of warming that is physically feasible for humanity to stay under and keep global civilization substantially intact. Much hotter than that, and we'll be beyond mere worldwide environmental disaster and into existential threat range.
3.6 °F is still a lot of warming. Think of a hot summer day, and then add 3.6 °F to it. Pretty damn hot! Picture of a cold winter night, and then make it 3.6 °F warmer. Changes things quite a bit, doesn't it? Maybe not in Minnesota, but you get the idea. 2 °C? Whoop dee doo. 3.6 °F? Damn!
It's funny, I've been using the metric system throughout my education and career, and yet, in many instances, hearing about the scale of things still only packs an emotional wallop when it's in English customary units. So, please use Fahrenheit when talking about climate change in a political context.
And if you (like me) were about to point out that, officially, the metric system is called the International System of Units (SI)... well, that just reinforces the point of this post. I know we all wish that the effort to go metric had succeeded in the 1970s, but what's more important: pedantry, or effectiveness? Updating our units of measure, or stopping climate change?