Part of the problem here is a very poorly written (or edited) quote in the summary. The relevant quote from TFA is:
"Trying to combat climate change exclusively with today's renewable energy technologies simply won't work; we need a fundamentally different approach." (emphasis mine)
They aren't saying that today's renewables aren't good or important. They are saying that by themselves it won't get to where it needs to be, because carbon-emitting forms of energy will always be cheaper than the renewables of today (even including incremental improvements on those technologies in the foreseeable future), and the energy industry will always try to give people what they want: the cheapest energy possible. They then go on to posit (again from TFA):
"What's needed are zero-carbon energy sources so cheap that the operators of power plants and industrial facilities alike have an economic rationale for switching over within the next 40 years"
Of course, that's a bit like saying "I don't know how, but somebody should discover magic fairy dust." But they are not saying that they have the solution to the problem; they are saying that we collectively need to invest in finding some new, unknown rabbit to pull out of the hat because our current ones will never achieve their price parity objective.