After reading the article it seemed both extensive and broken down well for a large audience that may not be the original target for publications in this field.
"There is nothing to fear because tech can't be bad / more tech will get us out of this mess / it's always been that way so no way it's man made / etc".
Particular among Ayn-Randish/Ray Kurzweil/Free Market/ types...
Any satisfactory solution would need to include some form of active cooling. These solutions are quite with are abilities. For example, prior to modern pollution regulations, we were actually cooling the planet because are pollutants reflected more heat than they trapped.
An event that I actually have figures for is 9-11. During the no-fly period following the attack, we saw a 1.8C increase in mean temperature in the USA (mean temperature tends to be consistent). Unfourtuantly, these cooling methods are short-lived and associated with long-lasting carbon, but they were accidental. I don't see any reason to believe we can not technology to actively cool the planet.