It mostly depends on your budget. Personally, I wouldn't purchase a digital camera that wasn't a digital SLR with interchangeable lenses. I'd buy a Canon Digital Rebel if I could, but those run significantly more than what you're looking at.
It also depends on your application. What are you trying to do with these photos? Blow them up to 20 inches and put them on the wall? Then forget this camera. Sell them? Forget this camera. However, if they're just for personal use and you don't really care whether or not you can enlarge them to gigantic sizes, then this camera might be a good match.
I noticed that the 35mm equivilant starting lense coverage is 38mm (it's a 38-300 coverage). When I shoot storms, I feel restricted by my 28mm lense, and that's a lot wider than yours. (As lenses get "wider", their number differences mean more. Thus, there isn't a huge difference between a 200mm lense and a 300mm lense, but the difference between, say, a 28mm lense and a 18mm lense is massive.) Most of the photos you see of storm structure are going to be taken with 18mm and down. What I'm trying to say is that while this camera zooms in really far, it doesn't pull back far enough for a lot of overall structure shots. Wide lenses are much more important than telephoto lenses when it comes to weather photography, IMO.