It's not a simple objection at all. Of course there are scholars who do so, but in practice, the costs are largely ignored, just like any externality tends to get ignored by individual agents in an economic system. That leads to an argument that environmental effects must fall under the umbrella of governmental responsibility, since those calculating cost/benefit ratios are rarely those who will pay the brunt of the costs of climate change and other such effects. This is especially evident if one considers the quality-of-life concerns, which are by their very nature cross-cutting, and thus hard to account for at the level of an individual or single corporation.