This interesting article points out how the nature and availability of insurance can be weaponized in wars such as Trump’s Iran action. If you have not been interested in maritime insurance before, you need to learn how it can work in such a dire situation as the Strait of Hormuz activities now.
It’s a war zone, to be sure. But many ships, shippers, and in fact countries, are dependent on passage. And they need insurance to do it.
Manipulating the insurance ecosystem is a potential way to shape the movement of ships in the Gulf of Hormuz or the Red Sea. It’s been used before, but we are now seeing novel approaches from the US government and from insurers.
Maritime shippers and operators will need to pay attention to this changing landscape.
Here’s a project that should have happened 20 years ago.
California’s major ports, at Los Angeles and Long Beach, have been desperate for relief from drayage traffic for containers they bring in. It was a struggle to get rail to the ports so that containers could be directly loaded. In 2002 the Alameda Corridor began to move double-stack double-track trains from near (but not on) the ports to the San Bernardino area. But rail service to the bulk of the US was still elusive. Transloading to 53-foot truck containers was the main activity in the Eastern valley. And that led to more truck traffic on the already busy freeways.
Remember that in the earlier days, pre-COVID, the land-bridge was still a preferred route from Asia to Europe. Ship to LA/Long Beach, Rail to New York or another eastern port, and ship again to Europe. It was lower cost and shorter time than any other Asia-North Europe route. And that included the numerous delays in moving goods by rail out of the port areas.
The problem has been urgent because of air pollution from the many drayage trucks traversing the area. California has been trying to address this problem from many directions. One of the first methods was the Clean Trucks program, which banned engines earlier than 2007 carrying to and from ports, and imposed other requirements on NOx and particulate emissions, especially PM2.5, a demonstrated pathogen for breathing problems. Gate reservations came next, as an attempt to articulate delivery and pickup with container movements in the yard.
But many noticed that switching from truck to rail would cut pollution even faster, and perhaps even improve efficiency. Numerous researchers, including my coauthor Chris Clott and me, suggested that moving functions off the port quickly to inland sites, called inland ports, would work. We even suggested, back when the land-bridge was functioning well, that inland ports as far away as Chicago could boost efficiency. The ports were not interested at that time.
Meantime, the ports and private firms have invested in the Alameda Corridor, which took double-stack, double-track trains through a frantically busy melange of LA suburbs, with many overpasses and intersections that had to be rebuilt, and many regulatory challenges.
Now finally, BNSF, a major Class I railroad, one of two serving the West Coast, has committed to a large inland rail intermodal terminal. It’s near Barstow, CA, out in the desert, kind of toward Las Vegas. This large inland port will be able to eliminate over 200 million truck miles by its completion in 2028.
The latest yard technology will be used, including zero-emission cranes, forklifts, and hostlers, electric plug-ins for refrigerated containers, and hybrid rubber-tired gantry cranes. BNSF has also committed to use the cleanest available switching locomotives in the yard.
The project is appropriately nicknamed BIG (for Barstow Intermodal Gateway). The press release says “By relocating container sorting and processing from congested port-adjacent communities to Barstow—a high desert hub with strong transportation infrastructure—the project enables a major mode shift from trucking to cleaner, more efficient rail.”
California and its residents are serious about industry controlling pollution.
Christopher Clott, Bruce C. Hartman, Supply chain integration, landside operations and port accessibility in metropolitan Chicago, Journal of Transport Geography, Volume 51, 2016, Pages 130-139, ISSN 0966-6923, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.12.005.
The UN Trade and Development’s (UNCTAD) final Global Trade Update of 2025 is a very interesting report. Far from the death of international marine trade, the volume (by value) is surging 7% in 2025. That’s largely due to the increased trade between Asia and the developing world, largely in the South and Africa. US trade is distinctly off, but that’s not stopping the rest of the world from profiting by international trade.
Trade inflation increased in Q2 and Q3 2025, but is set to decrease in Q4 2025. The graph shows overall price of traded goods: trailing four quarters and quarterly growth. The data do not include services.
This chart shows that trade indeed has the power to drive costs down for consumers. Tariffs may have a short-term effect, but international trade finds a way to get around the restrictions. No market in the world is so big that you have to trade there. And ultimately the futility of tariffs hits home, and countries back off from imposing them. A quadrant diagram of exports and imports shows how East Asia and Africa are driving global trade now. They are the two regions showing positive percentage growth in both exports and imports through September 2025. (Again services are excluded).
Services trade growth continued to be strong. This chart shows China, India, Japan, and South Africa led export growth by percentage, while many developed countries continued to increase major imports of services.
The whole report makes interesting reading. Kudos to the authors. It can be found here:
Supply Chain and Logistics 