Just enter your email
This is a welcome commentary on the potential for open access fees to prevent citizen scientists from publishing. It is an important issue since publishing by citizen scientists may become more frequent.
However, the commentary would be strengthened by making one correction and one addition. The correction needed is the false assumption that all open access publishing involves a cost to the author. About 70% of open access journals do not charge a fee to the author. However, due to open access "megajournals" a majority of open access articles are published under this model. See Walt Crawford's "Gold Open Access Journals 2011-2015" for data on this subject (http://waltcrawford.name/goaj1115.pdf).
The commentary would also be strengthened by adding a mention of fee waivers at open access journals. A majority of open access journals, including PeerJ, have fee waivers, though many are limited to authors from low and middle-income countries. See Stuart Lawson's "Fee Waivers for Open Access Journals" for more information (http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/publications3030155).
These changes to the commentary would not provide a comprehensive solution, since not all journals have waivers, and those that do often have limitations. While it is likely that a citizen scientist could find a journal to publish in, that journal might not be his or her first choice.
The author's idea of supporting fees for citizen scientist publishing through national funding bodies is an interesting one, though perhaps difficult to achieve. Other solutions the author might advocate for are journal subsidies from libraries that remove costs from either the author or reader, or changes in waiver policies to include unaffiliated authors.
Minor improvements to this commentary might include ordering the table from highest to lowest fee, and adding a link for each reference.