The Google Play: Energy Isn’t a Utility Anymore

On Monday, Alphabet announced it’s acquiring Intersect Power for $4.75 billion. This isn’t headline news for most people. But for logistics professionals, it’s a signal that Big Tech is solving a critical supply chain bottleneck by owning the hardware directly.​

Here’s the problem: AI data centers consume massive, firm power 24/7. The public grid can’t build interconnection capacity fast enough to meet demand. Queues in Texas and California stretch 5+ years. Utilities can’t reliably commit to the megawatt-hours hyperscalers need.

Google’s solution? Stop asking the utility. Build it yourself.

By acquiring Intersect, Google secures a pipeline of several gigawatts of solar and battery storage across Texas and California—power generation that will be owned, operated, and directly integrated with Google’s data center footprint.​

This is vertical integration at scale. It signals that for the next decade, energy availability is a supply chain asset that Big Tech companies will compete to own and control, just like fiber optics, semiconductors, or data.

What This Means for Freight

Building renewable energy infrastructure isn’t digital. It requires millions of tons of physical equipment.

A single 1 gigawatt solar farm requires roughly:

* 2,500+ truckloads of solar panels (fragile, high-value, often from domestic plants)

* 1,500+ truckloads of steel racking (flatbed freight)

* 600+ truckloads of battery storage systems (Hazmat, heavy-haul)

Total: ~5,000 truckloads per gigawatt.

That’s not counting the inverters, transformers, switchgear, concrete, and staging yard logistics. This is complex, remote-site project cargo work—not dock-to-dock dry van.

And it’s just getting started. As Microsoft, Meta, and Amazon see Google locking in power, they’ll replicate the model. The total addressable market for “AI Infrastructure Cargo” could exceed 50,000 truckloads annually by 2027.​

The Strategic Hedge: Project Cargo is counter-cyclical. When the economy slows and dry van rates crater, infrastructure builds keep moving because Big Tech’s capex is recession-proof. If you’re a carrier, this is a 3–5 year runway of predictable, margin-positive freight.

The UP–NS Play: Connecting East and West

On December 18th, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern officially filed their merger application with the Surface Transportation Board (STB).​

The centerpiece of the filing? Volume 3: Statements in Support—3,555 pages of shippers, ports, government officials, and economic development groups explaining why a transcontinental merger is in the public interest.​

Think of Volume 3 as the political roadmap. It shows:

* Which corridors matter most

* Which customer types expect to win

* Which regions have the political cover to make this happen fast

What the Numbers Promise

The combined railroad proposes:​

* 50,000 route miles across 43 states, linking 100+ ports

* 10,000 existing lanes converted from interline (slow handoffs) to single-line service (faster, cheaper)

* 84,000 new county-to-county lanes where trucking was the only option due to rail complexity

* Two new daily intermodal trains from California to the East, cutting transit times by 20 hours to the Ohio Valley, and 48+ hours to the Southeast

The “Watershed” region—Ohio Valley, Mississippi crossing points—gets the biggest boost. For the first time, shippers in these historically truck-dependent regions would have single-line rail service.

What Volume 3 Reveals

The statements are the tell. If a shipper or region is loudly represented in Volume 3, they likely locked in early win commitments: priority scheduling, new ramps, capital investment in their corridors.

If your lanes aren’t in Volume 3, you’re not in the first design wave.

For 3PLs and shippers, this matters because the merger (if approved) won’t roll out evenly across the network. Winners and losers will be determined by who showed up to support the filing.

The Regulatory Path

The STB will review the filing over the next 12–18 months. While the lawyers fight, UP and NS aren’t waiting.

They’ve already launched interim joint intermodal services through Kansas City, bypassing the Chicago interchange bottleneck. If these preview lanes work, it strengthens their argument to regulators that the merger improves competition and service.​

For shippers moving intermodal freight from West to East, now is the time to test the new lanes and use them as leverage in your rate negotiations with truckload carriers.

The Takeaway

Two narratives. Same theme: Infrastructure ownership is the new competitive advantage.

Google owns energy. UP–NS want to own the unified East-West corridor.

For logistics leaders, the signal is clear: Your traditional advantages—low-touch brokerage, spot freight margins, routing optionality—are being displaced by companies building hard infrastructure.

The winners in 2026 will be those who:

* Specialize in project cargo (not commodity freight)

* Integrate with new rail corridors before they’re optimized

* Build relationships with anchor shippers who are represented in Volume 3

The map is rewriting. Make sure you’re on the right side of it.

Read the Filing: UP–NS have published all STB filing volumes at up-nstranscontinental.com. Volume 3 is the most actionable for logistics professionals.

2025 didn’t just bring softer demand and weird seasonality. It quietly rewrote the rules for what moves, where it moves from, and how it’s taxed and regulated.

In this FreightFA Brief, the focus is on three policy changes that most freight teams have not fully repriced into their 2026 plans:

1. Marijuana Reclassification: Niche Upside, Big Liability

The U.S. move to reclassify cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III looks like a healthcare story, but it has freight consequences.​

* More medical cannabis products and research over time means more regulated, high‑value SKUs that need secure transport and tight chain of custody.

* At the same time, DOT drug‑testing rules for CDL drivers are now in a legal gray area, with industry groups warning about increased safety and litigation risk if marijuana use isn’t clearly prohibited in carrier policies.​

For shippers and carriers, this is a slow‑burn niche. The real risk isn’t missing the upside—it’s wandering into it without the right safety policies, insurance, and specialized equipment.

2. De Minimis Is Dead: Cross‑Border E‑Com Grows Up

The bigger near‑term shock is the effective end of de minimis (Section 321) as we knew it.

* A July 2025 executive order suspended duty‑free treatment for low‑value imports under the $800 threshold, with full effect rolling in by late summer.​

* Trade and customs experts spent Q3 and Q4 confirming the new reality: those “duty‑free” small parcels now need standard customs entries, duties, and clean data.​

Operationally, that means:

* Cross‑border DTC and marketplace parcels are more expensive and more complex to move.

* Many brands will consolidate shipments (fewer tiny parcels, more consolidated freight) and lean harder on 3PLs, forwarders, and customs brokers that can handle compliance and distribution together.​

This is a structural tailwind for logistics providers with strong cross‑border e‑com products and real customs capability. It’s also a margin squeeze for merchants who built their economics on de minimis arbitrage.

3. Tariffs 2.0: Sourcing and Lanes Get Redrawn (Again)

Layered on top of all this: tariffs are back with teeth.

* 2025 brought new and higher U.S. tariffs on a range of Chinese goods, including EVs, batteries, solar, and a 25% tariff on many medium and heavy vehicles and parts.​

* Tariff trackers now show collections above $200 billion, helped by “reciprocal” measures and continued pressure on strategic sectors.​

For freight and supply chain:

* Sourcing continues to shift out of China and into Mexico and other “China+1” locations, driving more cross‑border Mexico–U.S. volume and new inland lane structures.​

* Importers are constantly rebalancing SKUs, origins, and ports to optimize the mix of duties, lead times, and transportation cost, which shows up as sudden lane and volume volatility for carriers and 3PLs.​

Why This Matters for 2026 Planning

These three moves aren’t academic. They directly change:

* What is moving (new cannabis SKUs, reshaped product portfolios under tariffs)

* Where it’s moving from (China to Mexico or other alternatives)

* How it moves (small parcels becoming consolidated freight; more customs friction, more compliance touchpoints)​

For shippers, that means your 2026 routing guide, trade strategy, and network design need to talk to each other. For carriers and 3PLs, it’s a chance to step up as the partner who can handle cross‑border, customs, and regulated product—not just be “cheap capacity on a lane.”

Who to forward this to

* The person who owns your routing guide

* Your trade compliance/customs lead

* Whoever is modeling 2026 freight budgets and network scenarios

If they aren’t baking in weed, de minimis, and tariffs, they’re working off last year’s rulebook.

If you’re new here, subscribe to FreightFA to get these kinds of signals before they show up as surprises in your P&L.

A 5-minute breakdown of the US naval blockade on Venezuelan tankers and what it means for your freight costs, routes, and compliance exposure in 2026. War-risk insurance is tripling. Bunker surcharges are locked in for January. And the Caribbean just became high-risk. We decode the mechanics, spell out three realistic scenarios (Stalemate, Escalation, Settlement), and give you five immediate moves to protect your supply chain before Q1 rates spike. Built for shippers, procurement teams, and network design leads who need to act now.

Consolidation Never Stops

Three industries. One pattern. And it’s coming to rail.

Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern want to merge into a $250 billion mega-railroad—the largest consolidation proposal in rail history. They promise efficiency, faster transits, and better economics for shippers. It sounds great. But if you’ve been paying attention to what’s happened in telecom and streaming over the past five years, you know how this story ends.

The T-Mobile–Sprint Blueprint

In 2020, T-Mobile and Sprint merged after years of regulatory battles. The pitch was irresistible: combine two strong networks, build 5G faster, drive innovation and competition in the market. Regulators agreed. The deal closed.

What happened next? Within two years, T-Mobile raised rates across the board. They killed off Sprint’s cheaper prepaid brands. And suddenly, all three major carriers—Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile—were pricing remarkably alike. The “Big Three” sat down at the same table, and innovation stopped mattering. Consumers in major markets lost budget options. Rural coverage improved, but you paid a premium for it.

The Disney–Fubo Story (Happening Now)

Fast-forward to 2025. Disney just acquired Fubo, the last independent live-sports streaming service standing.

The promise? Combine Hulu + Live TV with Fubo to create a seamless, superior sports-streaming experience. One app, better content, easier management.

The reality? Fubo as a standalone alternative, vanishes overnight. One less competitor in the market. Disney now controls sports streaming for millions of households. Yes, users get a “better bundle.” But the real story is about power. Fewer players mean less leverage for anyone negotiating with them—sports leagues, advertisers, content creators, and viewers.

Why This Matters for Rail Shippers

U.S. rail is already concentrated. There are only six Class I railroads left. Remove one, and you’re down to five. Give one of them 40 percent of the market, and you’ve fundamentally changed the negotiating landscape.

Think about it like this: Right now, if UP or NS treats you unfairly on rates or service, you have options. BNSF is there. The eastern railroads exist. Regional carriers and short lines provide alternatives and competitive pressure. But if UP absorbs NS and grows to 40 percent market share—and if other competitors continue to shrink—those options narrow. A lot.

The T-Mobile–Sprint merger showed us what happens: pricing aligns upward. The Disney–Fubo deal shows us what happens: your alternatives disappear.

The FreightFA Brief is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

The Integration Window Is the Real Killer

But here’s what keeps supply chain leaders up at night: the integration itself.

When T-Mobile merged with Sprint, it took months for the network to stabilize. Dropped calls. Coverage gaps. Service degradation in markets that had relied on Sprint. Customers were frustrated, but they couldn’t leave—they were locked in.

When Disney merged Hulu Live and Fubo, users saw apps consolidate, features disappear, and prices creep up. It wasn’t a disaster, but it was friction.

Now imagine that scaled to railroad operations. When UP and NS combine dispatching systems, merge rail yards, consolidate crews, and integrate operations across 50,000 miles of track, you’re looking at 18 to 24 months of chaos. Cars will pile up in consolidation points. Transit times will spike. Service commitments will be missed. And because you’re dependent on rail—because you can’t just switch carriers mid-route like you can with streaming—you absorb the pain.

Who Wins, Who Loses

If you’re moving freight transcontinentally—automotive parts from Mexico to Detroit, chemicals from the Gulf Coast to the Pacific Northwest—a single-line railroad is genuinely valuable. One interchange point eliminated. Days cut off transit. That’s real money.

But if you’re a regional shipper, or if you depend on competition between UP and NS to keep rates in check, you’re looking at a tougher picture. Less competition. Rate pressure. And during the integration, service disruption with nowhere else to go.

What You Should Do Now

Map your flows. If more than 20 percent of your freight moves on UP or NS, you need to know it. Model what happens if that capacity becomes more expensive or less reliable.

Lock in rates. Before this merger closes, negotiate multi-year contracts with language that protects you from service degradation during integration. Make rate adjustments conditional on service levels, not just time.

Diversify. Build intermodal and truck alternatives. Work with 3PLs and regional carriers. Don’t put all your eggs in one railroad’s basket.

Join the conversation. Shipper coalitions are already lobbying the Surface Transportation Board for conditions and protections. If you’re serious about shielding your supply chain, get involved.

Scenario plan. Run the numbers: What if rates jump 15 percent? What if transit times increase 20 percent for 18 months? What mode shifts or network redesigns would you need? Build that into your strategy now, not when the integration chaos hits.

The Bottom Line

Consolidation is the story of the 2020s. Telecom did it. Streaming is doing it. Now rail. Each time, regulators sign off, companies promise efficiencies, and for a while, the story seems to work. But the pattern is clear: fewer competitors means less pricing pressure, less innovation, and more leverage for whoever’s left.

The UP-NS merger might create a more efficient network. It might also hand us a near-monopoly at the worst possible economic moment. You can’t afford to wait and see which it is.

Start planning today.

Thanks for reading The FreightFA Brief ! This post is public so feel free to share it.

The FreightFA Brief is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Dec 17: When ‘64K New Jobs’ Still Feels Like a Freight Recession

Dec 16: Fragile Trucks, Expensive Air, Squeezed Supply Chains

Dec 15 Update: China Imports Down 20%, Carriers Actually Didn't Choke