The article has a pretty interesting argument and seems logical. If a vehicle has some minimum set of vertexes and safety equipment that are held constant despi

The article has a pretty interesting argument and seems logical. If a vehicle has some minimum set of vertexes and safety equipment that are held constant despite size, then faced with higher fuel economy standards the automaker can choose between lengthening edges (cheap and certain) or changing engine technology (expensive and risky). "Generally, the larger the vehicle footprint, the lower the corresponding vehicle fuel economy target. Footprint-based standards help to distribute the burden of compliance across all vehicles and all manufacturers. Manufacturers are not compelled to build vehicles of any particular size or type (nor does the proposed rule create an incentive to do so), and each manufacturer will have its own fleet-wide production-weighted standard that reflects the vehicles it chooses to produce." [0] "CAFE standards signaled the end of the traditional long station wagon, but Chrysler CEO Lee Iacocca developed the idea of marketing the minivan as a station wagon alternative, while certifying it in the separate truck category to allow compliance with less-strict CAFE standards." 0. https://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/cafe/2017-25_CAFE_NPRM_Factsheet.pdf https://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/cafe/2017-2... 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_economy#SUVs_and_Minivans_created_due_to_original_mandate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_economy...