Sleet, ice, deep-freeze hit large swath of US
http://channels.isp.netscape.com/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/1001/20131208/md0622.htm

A powerful storm system that spread hazardous snow, sleet and freezing rain widely across the nation's midsection rumbled toward the densely populated Eastern seaboard on Sunday, promising more of the same.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/06/california-cold_n_4401549.html

Forecasters said the potent system already blamed for numerous power outages and thousands of weekend flight cancellations elsewhere, has Virginia and other Mid-Atlantic states in its icy sights before the Northeast is up next.

Icy conditions were expected to last through the rest of the weekend
Al Gore’s ‘polarbeargate’ scientist forced to retire
http://theinternetpost.net/2013/12/07/al-gores-polarbeargate-scientist-forced-to-retire/

An Alaska scientist whose observations of drowned polar bears helped galvanize the global warming movement has retired as part of a settlement with a federal agency. Charles Monnett was briefly suspended in 2011 from his work with the U.S.

http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/nytimes-unprecedented-concentration-of-sea-creatures-near-shore-in-california-experts-baffled-longtime-residents-astounded-video#sthash.tpnBVDof.dpbs

massive storms, increased volcanic activity, dinosaurs dying, mammoth dying sea levels rising 100 metres etc.
It all happened without a Carbon Tax. So, what or how will a Carbon Tax prevent the next of Earth's evolutionary cycle ?

Australian Prime Minister Abbott should answer whether AGW - Kyoto science has measured and assessed photosynthesis-linked warmth in ocean algae proliferated by sewage and other nutrient pollution.

The leader of government should get to understand AGW science is very incomplete, so as not to go ahead with yet another cost burden and waste of time associated with CO2 non-sense.

Using extreme weather events to drum up public interest in a direct action scheme is not good enough.

Plant matter in animal cud has been measured and assessed in AGW science so why not ocean algae plant matter?

Algae is even so dense in some areas it is causing anoxia in unprecedented modern day ocean dead zones.

There is clear proof algae has not been measured and assessed, especially in the Arctic where ice is reported melting more than usual. Unprecedented blooms of algae have only recently been found there.

Quote, "The finding reveals a new consequence of the Arctic's warming climate and provides an important clue to understanding the impacts of a changing climate and environment on the Arctic Ocean and its ecology."

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/ocean-bloom.htm

An "l" is missing in the link. Sorry. Try here:
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/ocean-bloom.html

Perhaps put it this way.

What could be the possible cost of ongoing extreme weather events if the actual cause of ocean warming is not being addressed?

Then include cost of ongoing CO2 tax, or any direct action or other ETS-type costs?

No wonder the economy is in a mess and going downhill, GM and others perhaps leaving, Qantas business stalling, fuel refinery moves offshore, cost of electricity and water increasing even more.

The cost is not just for weather event damage.

"The high cost of extreme weather events" could only have been written by someone who gleans most of their "knowledge"(sic) from the ABC.

It implies that if Oz holds fast to its pre-LNP emission reduction pledges it will stop climate change dead in its tracks. But, even supposing the IPCC linking of recent "extreme" (?) weather and CO2 is sound, Oz cutting emissions by 5% --or 100% for that matter --will not alter anything unless the rest of the world follows suit, and it is not looking even remotely like that will happen: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-15/japan-sets-new-emissions-target-in-setback-to-un-treaty-talks.html

Further, it is doubtful whether Robert is really concerned about costs anyway, for if he were he wouldn't be spruiking an IPCC program which includes multi-trillion dollar payola's to the underdeveloped world in the guise of climate reparations-- THAT IS WHERE THE REAL COSTS WILL BE.

So, in view of this, the article might have been better titled : "The High Cost of Toadying up to the IPCC"