Not because people are pushing for them, but because they’re cheaper and easier.

They've been cheaper and easier for some time. Wind power, in particular, was a profitable source of off-shore energy for decades. Electric cars and trams were actually superior to ICE engines from the late 19th century into the 1930s, and only lost market share thanks to a sudden drop in fuel prices.

A big part of our adherence to fossil fuels stemmed from political decision making. For residential energy demands, renewables have always been superior. But for military technology, ICE engines remained essential. That made the Middle East a nexus of post-WW2 conflicts and the Petro-Dollar a pivotal tool for western politicking in the region.

What we had in the 1950s and 60s was an artificial petroleum glut, relative to demand, created by our military presence on the Saudi peninsula. And what we've continued to enjoy into the modern day is an artificially cheap fossil fuel market.

we’ll eventually hit a tipping point where it costs you more to use non-renewables and the migration becomes self-sustaining at that point.

That hinges on the theory that American domestic economic interests start guiding our energy policy. I don't see any evidence to support this in practice. I suspect the US will continue to cling to fossil fuels well after the rest of the world has pivoted away, entirely because our military industrial complex demands it.