It seems like the article itself states the Democratic position.
While we strongly support innovative clean energy solutions and recognize the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels, this failed horrible project demonstrates that not all renewable technologies are created equal. As many on the left noted for YEARS, this project as designed would destroy an irreplaceable pristine habitat and decimate many threatened plant and animal species.
As an independent, I also recognize the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels and support investments in technologies that can make that possible. But we don't know yet what are the winning solutions. I'm a big fan of nuclear. Among other green options, solar, wind, and geothermal are all not one size fits all options, but each can work in particular locales. Hydrogen fuel cells vs. EVs vs. hybrids, what wins? Like a big company donating to both candidates running for office, maybe you invest in more than one place, knowing that one or more will fail and that you don't know upfront which one will win out.