Energy poverty cannot be solved anytime soon unless the concept of economic scarcity is taken into account in relation to fossil fuels.
On a planet where massive energy poverty exists, should a range of safe forms of energy that have been used by all of humanity for hundreds of years (and are the basis for almost all wealth) be taken off the table for anyone who wants to use them?
And yes, that is exactly what is happening.
Reducing the supply of fossil fuels directly affects the ability of the poor, and anyone really, to access the cheapest possible energy.
All in a bid to try to engineer far-flung and highly uncertain climate scenarios of the future, many of which have been promised for decades but are far from eventuating, and may soon even move in the opposite direction.
And no, there is no way to mandate reductions in fossil fuel usage without negatively affecting the ability of the poor, on a global scale, to access energy.
It is a simple economic equation (and the very concept this site was founded on).
In reality, this plays out via the likes of higher retail energy prices, increased supply chain costs, less reliability, or simply not having energy readily available when needed (like a jerry can of petrol in the back of your SUV…).
It is the law of economic scarcity, and if compulsorily reducing fossil fuel supply and usage is what you’re advocating, no matter where it is in the world, then you are actively (even if inadvertently) taking subsistence-level food off the table of billions of people (and you are probably a dastardly Malthusian, even if you don’t know it…).
It’s “the science”…