When accounting for negative externalities such as "unpriced natural capital consumption", it seems only fair to also include positive externalities, such as "food/energy availability"
How are those positive externalities? The person who burns the fuel gets the benefits, everyone else has to live with the pollution without benefitting.
A farmer that burns fuel to produce food gets paid for the food that burning the fuel enabled. There is no positive externality that needs to be compensated here.
If you wanted to make an argument about positive externalities you would talk about farmers leaving the soil in better condition than they arrived i.e. regenerating natural capital instead of burning it.
A farmer that burns fuel to produce food gets paid for the food that burning the fuel enabled. There is no positive externality that needs to be compensated here.
If you wanted to make an argument about positive externalities you would talk about farmers leaving the soil in better condition than they arrived i.e. regenerating natural capital instead of burning it.