The comparison needs perspective. The fact that night vision goggles amplify light levels by a factor of 1 * 10^4 to 5 * 10^4, isn't relevant to the issue of doubling night vision in an unaided eye. That would be like saying the existence of the Hubble space telescope means binoculars serve no purpose.

One might instead compare the cost of a night vision scope versus the cost of the described chlorophyll approach. Or compare the fields of view, or the required weight to be carried in the field.