BORDER CROSSINGS AND RAILWAYS: THE INTERMODAL AS A CAPACITY VALVE FOR FOREIGN TRADE

The U.S.–Mexico border is one of the most dynamic trade arteries in the world. Every day, thousands of shipments cross with inputs, components, and finished goods that feed integrated supply chains. In that context, any friction at the border becomes a direct cost: inventory stuck in motion, missed delivery windows, disrupted production sequences, and reactive firefighting inside the warehouse.

Recent data helps size the scale. In October 2025, the value of transborder freight between the United States and Mexico reached $78.1 billion; in November 2025 it was $71.1 billion. That is tens of billions per month moving through a system where variability is expensive.

‍

Intermodal as a response to capacity pressure

When crossings become congested, competition is not only about price, it is about capacity. Intermodal offers a way to move large volumes with less dependence on “whatever truck capacity is available today” and with a more schedule-driven logic on the long-haul segment. It does not remove border risk, but it changes how risk is managed: timetables, consolidation, terminal windows, and execution discipline.

In practice, trucking remains dominant, but rail is not negligible when measured in scale and stability. In October 2025, truck freight accounted for $58.2 billion of U.S.–Mexico transborder value, while rail accounted for $8.5 billion (roughly about one-tenth of that month’s total). In November 2025, truck was $52.9 billion and rail $7.4 billion, with a similar ratio. In other words: intermodal does not replace trucking, but it can relieve pressure on key corridors when volume rises faster than highway capacity.

‍

What companies truly gain by reducing variability

In foreign trade, the most expensive problem is not always the unit transport cost, it is variability. An unplanned delay forces overtime, urgent shipments, reshuffled receiving windows, and in extreme cases, production stoppages. That chain reaction can cost more than any rate savings.

This is where cross-border intermodal creates value: it reduces the need to operate in permanent “emergency mode.” Lower variability means higher planning power. Companies can schedule receiving, align safety stock with real risk (not fear), and stabilize production sequencing. The upside is operational and financial: fewer urgencies mean less reactive spending and less working capital trapped in “just-in-case” inventory.

This becomes even clearer at major gateways. For example, in March 2025, Laredo handled $30.5 billion in a single month (freight value), showing how small frictions scale massively when volume is concentrated.

‍

Infrastructure and digitization, the border as an operating system

Rail and intermodal do not work automatically. They depend on efficient terminals, binational coordination, and operational visibility. When companies have timely data on shipment status, location, and planned windows, they reduce idle time and improve asset utilization. At the border, the difference between a plan and improvisation is often data quality: what is coming, with which documentation, to which terminal, in what window, and how it connects to first and last mile.

BTS reporting also shows the border is not a single funnel, but a multi-node network by mode. For October 2025, top truck ports with Mexico included El Paso and Otay Mesa, while key rail connection ports included Laredo, Eagle Pass, and El Paso. That diversity enables resilience, but only if execution is governed through appointments, documentation readiness, in-transit inventory control, and contingencies.

‍

Rail as a “relief valve” when capacity investments land

Intermodal becomes more viable when infrastructure expands. One relevant example is CPKC, which highlighted the expansion (“twinning”) of its international rail bridge at Laredo, stating it more than doubles border capacity and accelerates growth between Mexico’s industrial heartland and markets across the U.S. and Canada. These investments do not eliminate variability by themselves, but they increase the room to shift more freight into scheduled, scalable flows when the market tightens.

The strategic point is simple: intermodal rarely wins on raw speed. It wins on stability when the system is executed with discipline. The border rewards planning and punishes improvisation.

‍

The border rewards planners, not improvisers

Cross-border intermodal will not replace trucking for every product and lane, but it can strengthen the logistics strategy when volume and consistency justify consolidation. The challenge is not only crossing the border, but crossing it repeatedly, with visibility and fewer surprises.

In integrated supply chains, time is measured not only in transit hours, but in operational continuity. Reducing variability improves planning, inventory control, and financial discipline. Well executed, intermodal does not remove complexity, but it makes complexity manageable. And in foreign trade, what is manageable is what scales.

‍