More employees = More buildings, More work, More everything, etc.
"I fail to see a casual relation between city size and carbon emissions. Why does New York City have higher emissions than McMullen, Alabama?"
[1]: https://sales.arte.tv/fiche/ESPIONS_POUR_LA_PLANETE
[2]: https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statemen...
"Its charter is not the science of climate change, but the national security impact of phenomena such as desertification, rising sea levels, population shifts, and heightened competition for natural resources."
1: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/...
It could also be from a third factor (population growth demands more work and more infrastructure which leads to more carbon emissions).
I’m not denying the correlation as it exists today (bigger employers probably emit more carbon into the atmosphere; or at least intuitively; I haven’t looked at the data), but that correlation is by no means neither necessary (you could theoretically employ a lot of people without having any carbon emissions) nor sufficient (you can be a very large polluter with only robots doing all the work; like a big automatic aluminum smelter).