But what about the irreversible damage to environment caused by economic growth? And when the damage starts to cause economic losses? Can anyone know how much nature can be safely damaged? Ecological disasters are rarely intentional.

I don't think the model you're proposing is reasonable. Take for example China: it is fair that the Chinese get the same economical level we already have, and it is certainly understandable they really want that. However, if they destroy their environment because of short-sighted economical decisions, they may never be able to get prosperous and it may be too late to find ways to tackle the problems then. Don't underestimate the cost of environmental damage. Economical losses alone are already huge.

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman