If she wants to make a difference her next speech will be delivered in Beijing, not Denver. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... for why.
The page you linked shows fossil CO2 emissions per capita:
China: 7.7t CO2/cap/yr
USA: 15.7t CO2/cap/yr
Denver seems like a good place to give a speech.
Of course, country size does matter, but it's unfair to simply compare total emissions when there's such a huge difference in population size.
It's important to reduce emissions everywhere, but China is the key player to watch.
I’m looking at the page I linked. Per-capita is basically irrelevant, the issue is the total emissions under the control of any one government. Or should China not act until they match the US per-capita but with 3-4x the population?
Further the US and European trends are already downwards. China’s is dramatically upwards.
US CO2 emission trends are downwards because the US stopped burning coal. In the same time, they've switched to natural gas produced by fracking. Fracking leaks methane. Taking methane and CO2 emissions together, US greenhouse gas trends are stable and not downward.
Source: https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-literal-gas...
I don't know about EU trends. I'm not very optimistic.
Total emissions definitely matter (no need to give speeches in Palau even if per-capita emissions are much greater than in the USA), but considering this number without regard to the population size is completely unrealistic and insensitive.
For China's overall emissions to get to the same level as the USA, that means a Chinese citizen would be expected, on average, to emit less than half of what a US citizen emits.
Would you expect a Chinese citizen to only eat half of what a US citizen eats, just because there are more people in their country ? Of course not.
China's trend is dramatically upwards because a big chunk of the population is still getting out of poverty. Of course CO2 emissions are increasing.
The ecosystem doesn’t actually care whose feelings are hurt, you know. It’s a weird argument to make. China is the single largest emitter of CO2, plastic waste in the oceans, etc etc. Yet we expect them to do nothing about it until 2030 at the earliest, but just stay on their upward trend. Which is about the same time as the ecosystem collapses entirely according to AOC. But we mustn’t be “insensitive” about it!
(Not that they'd be interested in that, but still.)