What you pointed out is significant and I probably should have mentioned it in the article together with the other things; my point, however, is that these problems kick in at a higher frequency than those historically reached by many accelerators and defended as "optimal" by marketing. In your example, 1 GHz is used as a "nice low frequency" which is a sensible order of magnitude for a modern process; people often believe that you have to go as low as 400 or 100 MHz. (Again, the numbers vary with process, this is just to illustrate the extent of the difference between what I think is the reality vs what I think are the popular beliefs.)