Not sure what the speech said but I woek in the energy sector. By and far wind turbines are an absolutely dog shit approach to energy. In the short term (mined materials) they are high energy consumers to be produced and ironically require the oil industry in their manufacturing process. In their life span, it takes a significant time to be net positive in energy, and then when their life span is over it would be net negative to properly recycle them. At least, the models typically seen in the US.

The curved models which are more futuristic looking (but ancient trch) could have a better bang for buck. Depends on what they are made out and maintenance requirements of but they should capture wind energy more efficiently.  

I used to be a bit fan of wind tech and ocean turbines until I looked into the reality of their use. Same with waste recycle plants that ultimately are too efficient and end up buying lumber to keep the fire burning, which is absolute counter to everything. 

People need to stop grouping all oil together as well. Cracking which is largely practiced in the US is detrimental to the environment.  Open mining has serious drawbacks, though does allow for multiple materials to be extracted in unison. However, in-situ is a whole other story. Super low impact, steam powered mining which has a sife effect of high amounts of steam energy output, and some of the best water recycling tech in the world. 

Obviously not a solution to things like off shore drilling and not practical everywhere, but also certainly an under used tech because it's cheaper to frack up the environment. 

Back on point, in-situ uses fractions of the land wind turbines do, extract many many magnitudes more energy, and when the oil is cleared from. The area, the site can be returned to a zero impact site. Basically made to look like people were never there.