Well, I don;'t think that the indirect effects are being much included at all. For example, the United Nations' Green Revolution was responsible for keeping perhaps a billion people from dying of starvation. They and their descendants now are causing a fair fraction of that "damage".
Are the US and other First World nations wholly responsible for correcting this damage as well as their direct effects, or in this case would it be appropriate to expect those whose lives were saved to contribute a portion of t\heir own upkeep, so to speak?
Strange that you use this as a rationale for handicapped parking places, which by definition are not equal-opportunity; they totally prohibit use by the non-handicapped.
A shopping center near me does not get my business because they made all their few tree-shaded parking spots handicapped spots (though these are not nearer the stores). Why? I asked, and was told it was so their cars wouldn't get hot inside. Well, we can't have handicapped people's cars get hot just like everyone else's cars do, right? Even if it means
the spots stay empty.
Once an event horizon forms, it doesn't matter what mass/energy formed a black hole; an all-energy black hole is called a kugelblitz.
No matter how much you accelerate it, though, a particle remains the same mass in its own frame. It just appears to have a higher energy to the initial frame. It's kind of like the question of an object being so fast relativity shortens it to a black hole density.
And of course, the more efficient the Dyson sphere, the less heat it radiates. At what temperature point would the law of diminishing returns have alien engineers say, "Ah, just radiate the rest of the energy to space, too much trouble to use it for anything more"?