Tina, this is merely another installment in the avalanche of fact-free renewables hype being put out by an increasingly marginalized and vitriolic antinuclear movement. You're completely excluding, or unaware of, the following considerations in your assessment:
1) How much power is required to run a cookstove, compared to the amount of power provided by the systems being hawked by VIA/Barefoot Power
2) Dangers posed by kerosene lamps are minimal compared to the cookstoves residents of third-world countries rely on - and SE4ALL endorses replacing these cookstoves with $billions worth of "clean" stoves, powered by carbon-emitting petroleum, and provided by Royal Dutch Shell - the seventh largest oil company in the world
3) Among SE4ALL's supposedly sustainable solutions is "the need [in Africa] to improve access to modern energy services and the prospects for oil and gas production" and for exploration of stranded gas technologies
4) The alternative energy solution you tout is a solar PV installation capable of supplying daytime power to one kibbutz in Israel, which at other times is wholly dependent on diesel generation from the neighboring city of Eliat
5) There is no possible justification for your claim that "centralized generation...is rapidly being replaced by distributed generation"
Finally, I'd like to point out that references to fifty-year-old nuclear policy, though a popular tactic of today's antinuclear movement, are a bit silly and anachronistic. It's time the public knew the truth about modern nuclear technology and its potential for providing a real solution to the problem of climate change.