I too would be interested in studies. But I do think environmental cost is factored in to the cost of most things, especially if due to environmental damage it

I too would be interested in studies. But I do think environmental cost is factored in to the cost of most things, especially if due to environmental damage it is no longer possible to get a Thing at any price. I think the true cost of a single pencil is well reflected. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5Gppi-O3a8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5Gppi-O3a8 The problem with the profiler analogy is that economic costs can open up economic gains, whereas wasting billions of cycles in a dumb loop opens up nothing. If you analyzed the human activities that produce the most environmental cost, the individual contributions would be nothing. Only when you look at economies of scale driven by collections of people do you get to anything remotely resembling significant numbers. And you might think "Let's ban all cars", since that's a somewhat noticeable effect in aggregate, but by doing so you would kill off many other parts of the economy. Depending on the reaction, it could be good or bad for the environment. It could be good if humanity went extinct and the costs we directly produce went to 0 (leaving only the 'natural' costs), but that's not a world I want to live in.