You will not believe how the climate scenarios are determined
I'm writing a book on energy, and looked into the insane climate scenarios. They posit use of vast quantities of oil, gas and coal.
The vast quantities come from something called 'learning by extraction' or LBE. In this scenario, you treat resources, not reserves, and assume extraction technology improves by 1% per year. Eventually all of the resources are used up. Reserves are meaningless. Costs are deflated by 1% every year. Naturally, energy is bountiful until the end of time, especially coal, which has enormous resources. Most of them cannot be mined economically, but who cares? LBE will take care of it.
This is a real thing, at least to bankers, and all of the climate scenarios, which posit, for example, that New York will be underwater by 2010, are based on LBE. Hint: it's 2026 and New York is STILL not underwater. This is where your myth of plenty comes from.
Huh, I never did look into how the IPCC predicts future fossil fuel use / emissions. Neat! Well, there's a silver lining for the climate at least. Between declining economically viable hydrocarbons and the upcoming population crash in developed nations, perhaps the oceans won't acidify too much before our emissions reduce by an order of magnitude. Hopefully civilization won't need as many hydrocarbons in the future 😅