I'm really trying to read a coherent argument into your comments which you're not making easy. You said that "all economic systems we tried so far destroy the environment" which is demonstrably false as you kind of acknowledged by now. All economic systems that grew out of the industrial revolution did, which is a very different statement. Or is your point that economy started at that point? Which is kind of true because seeing economy as a separate sphere outside of social life and ethics is relatively new. I think Adam Smith popularized that idea in his book "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations" in 1776.
And I'm still not sure what your conclusion is. You don't seem to blame the industrial revolution but see it as a given not even worth mentioning. Neither do you see it worth interrogating, how and why each system does what it does. The industrial revolution is about two centuries ago. We know about climate change for less than one century. Pollution is a different story but at least its long term consequences were not obvious 200 years ago. This is nothing in historical scales. Money exists in one shape or another for 5000 years. Even feudalism existed much longer (than the industrial revolution). Yet, you are sure we tried everything and there is no alternative. Nothing we can do. There is no hope.
Let me end with a quote of a very great author:
“We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.”
― Ursula K. Le Guin
This still doesn't address much of what I was saying but it shows that you are dealing in absolutes. There is a lot of time between the Neolithic and the steam engine. The steam engine is about two centuries old. A small fraction of this already short period is environmentalism a priority for anybody. What makes you so sure we've seen it all?
Also, to again reiterate, why not interrogate each system separately? Capitalism is about infinite growth which is ad odds with nature. The steam engine doesn't necessarily led to that. Bolshevism had other reasons. Other movements which try to make it right, fail because of the global hegemony of systems that don't. But for you, there are only two options and one isn't even an option.