just because energy use correlates to poverty, it doesn't necessarily mean energy policy should focus on alleviating poverty
https://www.elementascience.org/article/10.1525/elementa.419

the notion that one's approach in each policy domain should be dominant across all other policy domains — e.g. solar subsidies should be economically progressive & also racially representative — is idealistic & silly, and can be counterproductive

the ideal is probably to use taxes to make energy prices reflect the costs of production (health, climate change etc), & do economic redistribution separately, with cash

pragmatically, subsidies have been easier to achieve, which necessarily intermingles energy & social policy

at current margins it probably is win-win to tweak energy subsidies to make them more inclusive in terms of class, race, geography...

there are benefits to expanding e.g. residential solar into more marginal groups: greater awareness, jobs that create interests, build political support for clean energy policy etc

but there are limits to that logic also. once you get into the Pareto set, zero-sum tradeoffs exist