Switching to something new usually inherently costs money. (Capital expense) If you are scraping by, you can't afford another $500-$1000 a month car payment for a new car.

The option to convert an older already paid for internal combustion vehicle basically requires another $10k minimum, not including any regulatory stuff and that would be parts cost alone, no labor. Add to that regulatory/local registration issues with the diy route and you basically bake continued demand for fossil fuels into the system.

You can mitigate some of that by doing public transportation but you have to have a functional system AND an public that wants to use it.

This basically means that a large portion of the population who won't/can't buy new EVs. Is stuck using gas vehicles until you get lower cost used EVs. The problem there is that they are expensive to repair and NOT diy friendly. Add to that battery deg and lower reliability (in general see used teslas) and people are scared to buy used EVs.

Its a pricing problem that we have not gotten around yet. The subsidies helped but weren't enough to get more people in. Couple that with a bad economic situation where people are holding onto their older stuff for longer and you basically get only progress on the higher income side while lower income brackets have to still use their gas vehicles which means the producers keep producing and supplying to a captive market.

We can't replace it fully.

We can replace it with cars. We can replace it with trains as well, but electrified track is more expensive than just plopping a diesel engine there and filling her up. Track for that is just steel+concrete and rocks and stuff.

We can not replace it with air planes, helicopters, rockets. At all. We could reduce air travel and stuff like fighter jets.

We can also not replace it for cargo ships. And that's pretty bad news. Luckily ships are crazy efficient, so the actual CO2 and other pollution per ton and kilometer is very very low. If you get a delivery, that delivery comes in a fossil fuel truck to your doorstep, that truck will emit more CO2 than the ship will, going either from china to Rotterdam or the US westcoast. And also global transportation is probably more than necessary.

Anyway, the big problem we can solve are cars and planes.

There are also a bunch of chemical and industrial processes that need coal. Fertilizer and steel are two big ones.

I tried to parse what you wrote, but I honestly can't make any sense of it.

the people from the regions most affected as “lesser people”

Pretty sure this part is missing a verb and an object.

Because it is somewhat competitive economically in certain use cases and a ton of existing infrastructure was already built to use various fossil fuels.

The switch to non-fossil fuels was going to take at least a generation in most developed countries since you need to build out electricity generation and storage.

besides cars mass energy storage isnt available for all countries yet, so you need a way to balance grids. green energy resources doesnt have the ramp up required when energy usage spikes(e.g people get back from work). we dont suddenly put out more sun, make faster rivers or purposely make stronger winds for power. you balance the spike with the dirtier energy. so you often run into a situation where once green, a majority of your energy can be green, but you always have to reserve space for spike usage.

What is the alternative? In France electric cars are expensive, and I don't see chargers around me.