[EthanHeilman]

You can't model things like innovation on a hundred year time scale. The reason the predictions from the 1920s "would be comical" is not because people in the 1920s where all fools but because modeling future innovation over a 100 year time scale is extremely challenging. Even if you could include innovation it would reduce the benefit of such a model. Imagine you have a model that has access to a global temperature oracle and it says: "global temperature decreased 0.1 C in 2120 because of innovation". You don't know why that happened and so such a model would be mostly useless to achieving any result.

What you are proposing is like a software performance analytics tool that already includes the fact that you will improve the software performance in the current metrics. However the purpose of such a tool is to figure out where the performance problems are so that you can fix them. Adding such a feature makes the tool useless. What you want to see the baseline and then you want to model the impact of solutions after you discover them.

>What if in 100 years we make fusion work (probably for space travel/war?) and then we replace the existing infrastructure with that.

I think fusion will happen faster than that. However the model we are discussing only goes out 81 years so it doesn't cover the impact of events 100 years hence.