Not much in this article really. Starts out with claiming that progressives didn't like pollution, and thus became anti science. Doesn't elaborate. Drops the thread entirely, and continues with a couple different arguments.

First that subsidizing demand with constrained supply just increases prices. Fair enough. Second argument is that there are too many veto points in the building/producing pipeline. Probably also fair.

But that's really the whole Abundance argument, and the article alludes to that book repeatedly. I can't tell if this was supposed to be its own original argument, or just a description of the Abundance arguments. I bet there are better synopses of the Abundance arguments than this article though.