I don't know if you are a practicing scientist or not, but I have been an Engineer very close to science for a long time, Engineering being applied science, and something optional we might choose to do if we have scientific training.
I write with that knowledge when I accuse science, conventional science, of having failed to keep us safe, by fully analysing the energy system of nature, by failing to discriminate between mathematically positive and mathematically negative energy, such that we can model Earth as a battery, trickle charged by the sun.
This is what needs to be done to compare and audit the energy system of Earth and sun.
The language of renewables completely obscures this, and makes no sense at a fundamental level. To me, continuing to use it, after we can see that it is nonsense, makes a mockery of science, revealing actually a pseudo science which appears to have been driven by the profit driven extracted energy interests you correctly identify.
Further complicating this is that the connection of energy with money is little understood, because when we trace that through, it exposes that the practice of profit itself is directly connected with extracted energy, not just fossil fuels, but all business for profit, and look, most science is funded by for-profit business. And look, the CO2 which the whole climate change theory is based on is a symptom, a mathematical multiplier, of the practice of extracting energy from the planet, and look, this is related physically to increasing temperature. So the activity of science itself is related to rising temperature.
Conventional profit driven science obviously can't analyse that, it's impossible, it has to be non profit efforts like my own, which have to be the only analyses of it, and this takes us down a gaping chasm, of difference between working on mathematically positive or negative energy.
There is a massive difference between working in these two modes, they don't generally mix, when we try to mix them like we are doing physically by grid connecting domestic and community solar, strange things happen with money, it implies we need to have two kinds of money, a new one, issued in response to solar, and the old one, issued as debt.
But why would we continue with the old one when we find the new one is so much better.
Hence the whole financial industry is threatened, exposed as actually really backward and downright evil, when we realise how much life it unnecessarily causes, now we have a glimpse how different things can be, we caught a glimpse of it when massive stimulus was issued.
This is what I've tried to highlight by my stories on "Kardashev Money", and my most recent story on the Energy Polarity Multiplier Framework.
Notice I started this activity from PhD candidate activity.
I shelved that activity officially when I realised it could not be continued because of this issue of a gaping great hole in science around energy, which does actually align science and religion when we fill it in, but it's an unpaid activity, it seems it will probably remain unpaid until we do make the physical change of issuing Kardashev Money.
I hope this helps you see where the real failing of profit driven science is, it's much deeper than just fossil fuels, it's all energy, even the principles of destruction and creation, and human origins, how photosynthetic nature works, Ai, it's all of life, and it's an existential issue.