> This is obviously ignoring that fossil fuel vehicles have strong externalities which aren't paid by the consumer.
> As do electric vehicles which requires three current grids worth of wires to power them.
Your response doesn't logically match your intended message. It seems like you intend to disagree with the GP, but your response seems to validate the GP's point.
> three current grids worth of wires
Even if we assume it is true (it likely will not be because of home storage), by definition "3 current grids worth of wires" would be paid for by consumers buying electricity.
Consumers buying electric cars are required to buy even more electricity.
As such, with electric cars the externality you're point out is gonna be "paid [disproportionately] by the consumer causing it".
The electric car owners are not thr ones paying the externalities for it either. You can make the case the externalities are smaller but they still exist.
If we do need to triple the grid's copper, that would indeed result in unpaid externalities because of poor mining practices.
Hopefully, the grid doesn't need to triple because of local storage. If it does, hopefully, the recyleability of copper makes the one time cost of mining and refining a smaller externality.
