Food for thought:

http://theconversation.edu.au/heatwaves-mozzies-dengue-and-droughts-how-climate-change-threatens-our-health-13

For Jon J

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/NPP/news/npp-ceres-firstlight.html

As usual, facts get in the way of your favourite blogger.

I must have missed something, bonmot. What does your NASA site statement (which I've read) have to do with JonJ's reference to the costs of mitigation?

The proce should be $zero per tonne because this is a pheony goody goddies tax that is ridiculous.

We only need the mining rent resoruces tax to be beefed up to 40% and have a tax on share and derivative etc trading made by wealthy individuals and companies of 1% or something to support the working class materially, socially and culturally.

Climate change will not be improved by carbon tax or emmissions trading schemes. In fact we cannot even proove that variations in cliamte is due to carbon.

We should move to geo-thermal, solar , LNG etc and give tax breaks until these industries gain a decent market share over coal and then revert them to the full company tax rate after that.

No amount of media/government spin from goody goody middle classers will change my mind. In fact the relentless urging from them I view as an insultto me and to working class labor voters who have more mainstream industrial and union concerns.

The currant coal burning power providers are moving to solar and wind to divest their power generation. The carbon price will keep their mind on the job, without it nothing would happen.

Ted, I just want to correct an error in your article. You state that “The Federal Government also has a new long-term target: to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 80 per cent below 2000 levels by 2050. However, no details for the projected carbon price for each tonne of carbon dioxide for achieving this target have been given.”

Can I direct you to page 76 of the Treasury modelling (http://www.treasury.gov.au/carbonpricemodelling/content/report.asp) where chart 5.1 clearly sets out Treasury’s estimates of the carbon price out to 2050. The range in 2050 is from $130 to $275 per tonne of CO2 depending on the scenario considered.

It should also be pointed out that Treasury (realistically in my opinion if we insist on not using nuclear power) assumes that only just over half of the abatement will be domestically derived. The balance will come from international sources so this is not just a domestic issue as perhaps suggested by some of the comments here.