> If the negative externalities were priced in they would be at least twice as expensive

Quotation needed

For coal in the USA the stated cost for MWh in 2010 was $41. The external cost was $58.

This does not include for implicit and explicit subsidies. Including those would make the external costs higher.

The numbers change by country, time, energy source, and etc. so asking for a quotation is a bit of a fishing expedition. See Tables 1 and 2 at: https://www.climateadvisers.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/2...

If you have the spare time to read 507 pages of support, please see: https://www.nap.edu/download/12794

Current carbon capture tech charges about $500/ton (but this number is bound to get lower) of CO2, given the CO2 produced per KWh of Natural gas is 0.41kg/KWh, that adds about $0.20 per KWh to your electricity bill. Where I’m from, our mostly natural gas electric company charges $0.10/kwh. So adding $0.20 does indeed do more than double it (for now).

[1] https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11

Here's a source for a recent meta-analysis of hidden costs of fossil fuels [1].

Findings on the abstract already corroborate the parent comment.

[1] "The hidden costs of energy and mobility: A global meta-analysis and research synthesis of electricity and transport externalities" - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221462962...

The problem with this type of study is that it can by definition only cover the known externalities, but most of the price of externalities is far into the future. This means that the real margin of error is huge (and unknowable at this time).

Also it misprices tail risk, marking it to zero