Something that would be really helpful in stories like this is a comprehensible metric that places the role of HFC's in perspective.  For example, what % of GHG emissions are HFC's currently responsible for?

When instead, we get hocus pocus dramatics like the 1,000 times more heat trapping than CO2, and a 10% annual growth projection that enables usually suspect politcos to utter 'bending the curve' comments, it really doesn't help lay persons trying to grasp the big picture about an international agreement addressing what appears to be a quasi-religious concern.

Is that too much to ask of a journalism profession?