Excuse me, being sceptical here, but as soon  as I see statement like „…suggest a carbon dioxide-driven global warming catastrophe…“ it immediately starts an alarm bell. Then it continues about some “magma driven catastrophe” (not saying it cannot happen, but I very much doubt, that the Biden plan can fight an event like this) and continues  with “…The ignited oil and gas exploded at the surface…“ and here is my problem with this nicely written story: not saying, I am an expert in geology, but an oil/gas stored few hundred meters beneath of Siberia surface just cannot “explode” as described. 

It could have exploded if there was an oxygen, but in the deposit, there is none. Secondly, liquid lava has a temperature north of  1000C, in such environment, no organic material can survive. Here I can only speculate about chemical reactions, but very likely the oil would disintegrate, hydrogen would go free and eventually could move through the magma upwards to the atmosphere, explode/burn to form water steam. Carbon and other elements would likely react with magma, carbon does not become liquid till above 3500C. The lava burned everything on the surface. By the way, Siberia has lot of black coal (and oil), which is dated to Perm, so it was not burned, at least not all.

The Perm extinction is a geological fact, however the reasoning outlined early in the article has clearly a pollical/enviromental agenda. According to various sources, it was likely caused by a massive volcanic activity, hence CO2 was not the root of the cause but a consequence, but stories about CO2 and the global warming do pay bills of lot of people nowadays.