Obama got a little jab in at Romney in a speech in Iowa:
Noting that the Republican candidate has criticized wind energy, saying a windmill can’t be put on top of a car to power it, Obama had a zinger.
“I don’t know if he’s actually tried that,” Obama said. “I know he’s had other things on his car.”
I’m not going to comment on the Seamus thing because I think it’s dumb, but I am going to defend Romney here because he’s right. He’s making a distinction that most people seem to forget when they’re talking about alternative energy sources, the difference between electricity and liquid transportation fuels. I hear this mistake constantly from folks on the left, and it annoys me to no end. Energy sources such as wind and solar generate electricity, which you can’t use to drive around in your car unless you own an electric car, which most folks do not. And so we need to distinguish between alternative electricity sources and alternative liquid fuel sources (biodiesel or ethanol, for example). Those two can be used to drive around in your car.
So when you hear people say things like “we shouldn’t do biodiesel / ethanol because we should do wind / solar instead”, they’re comparing two things that shouldn’t be compared. That is not a criticism of wind energy because we need electricity too. It’s just an important distinction to make. We need both electricity and liquid fuels, but when we talk about alternative energy everyone seems to think that their favorite source should be done at the expense of all others, ignoring the important distinction. We can and should do both.
520 Chestnut 
I think it’s reasonable to claim that more renewable energy sources would equal less drain on the oil supplies that we have.