“They modelled data up to 1970, then developed a range of scenarios out to 2100, depending on whether humanity took serious action on environmental and resource issues. […] The book’s central point, much criticised since, is that “the earth is finite” and the quest for unlimited growth in population, material goods etc would eventually lead to a crash. So were they right?” The answer lies in Limits to Growth was right. New research shows we’re nearing collapse.
I’ve been thinking about this a lot… and I found that ye, “space” is limited on earth but time, as far as we know is not. Space yielded a lot of growth when it comes to finding new reserves of energies and natural resources, but time is what allows for innovation… but growth has also (even more?) been driven by innovation and progress.
So, all in all, I think it’s pretty obvious that the “space”-based growth is indeed limited and will also (always) come to an end as long as we’re stuck on this earth, but time-based growth is not and I’m confident that with more time we’ll always be able to grow more.