America and Britain have the natural good fortune to be able to potentially produce all its fixed electricity needs from wind power - offshore - if there's a will to do so. Onshore wind at scale is unwise but in any case should be a local matter.
Three angles to keep an eye on: battery storage (to keep the electricity flowing when there's less wind, and charge up when there's more); turbine construction and longevity (how long do they last, what resources are used up making them); and corporate/government grift (e.g. profiteering from dodgy biomass energy - especially in the USA - being classed as "green" when it's mostly just burning down forests and mincing animals).
Energy supply CAN be from 100% non-organic renewables, satisfying environmentalists and long-term profitable to capitalists. Short-term cash grab is the main obstacle, as always. Corporations exist to make money and pay out fat dividends. Governments are supposed to regulate corporate energy so as to protect against blind exploitation and short-term greed while facilitating innovation and healthy profits.
Let's hope - whoever is in power - they do a better job of protecting the country from the grift and the greed than previous corporation-serving governments. Hard to see why they'd bother, though, given how much money they can make from the green energy sector and how little accountability they have to worry about when elections roll around.