Meh, the most likely outcome of such experiments is that the introduced gene will vanish from the gene pool midterm.
I believe we don't know enough (yet) to take a risk of such experiments in the wild. More, I think that possibly even proper assesment of such risk is currently not possible
[0] while this scenario is probably very unlikely I'm not sure that such risk should be taken
To put it as an optimization problem: a huge portion of the search space has been (and is actively being) searched already, with the current species as the optimal solution for the given ecological niche. Changing the genomic setup will with a high likelihood move away from this optimum, rendering your "new" species less fit for its niche.
Both genetics and ecology are hugely complex subjects that no one is even close to fully understanding. So we don't know in advance that this will be ultimately beneficial for humans, don't know that the success (for humans) of a previous program for mosquitos will translate into success here, we don't know that infertility won't be circumvented by other genetic factors, don't know that the modification won't become a permanent part of that moth's gene pool, what effects that will have on the moths, don't know how it will affect species that consume these moths and don't know how this will affect the numbers of species these moths consume. And we don't mind that the profits made will probably be private and any costs socialised or paid by the wider ecosystem.
But meh, let's not apply the precautionary principle. Let's just roll the dice with an unknown number of sides.
New self-limiting moths need to be released each season.