Thread

ASML says it sold 'absolutely nothing' in Europe in 2026

402 points · 900 comments · MC995

HPsquared · 1790346004 · focus · HN ↗
Semiconductor fabs involve a lot of hazardous chemicals, process changes and high energy consumption. Exactly the kind of thing European regulations tend to deter or slow down. Which is somewhat fine if there is nowhere else to build it, but if other places are easier, well...
1. l5870uoo9y · 1790347111 · focus · HN ↗
  > high energy consumption
  Just to address this separately: there is effectively energy rationing in several European countries, where the government intervenes to prioritize who should receive energy first (e.g., the Netherlands and Denmark).
  1. alephnerd · 1790347246 · focus · HN ↗
    Most fabs build their own separate power grid.
    And Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are also energy poor states that have been able to maintain capacity.
    The energy excuse is true for some manufacturing processes like automotive in CEE which were pants that were built in the 1990s to 2000s and leveraged Russian ONG, but is a red herring for a lot of other manufacturing processes in Europe.
    European states have a coordination problem as Draghi pointed out 2 years ago.
    peri-cl · 1790348374 · focus · HN ↗
    TSMC alone uses 1/8th of Taiwan's electricity (and rising). They make it work.
    <a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/taiwan-semiconductor" rel="nofollow">https://spectrum.ieee.org/taiwan-semiconductor
    <a href="https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/tsmc-could-account-for-24-of-taiwans-electricity-consumption-by-2030/" rel="nofollow">https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/tsmc-could-accoun...
    Panoramix · 1790499653 · focus · HN ↗
    Also, if you start now you would not compete with TSMC in the coming 20-30 years, so the energy requirements won't be that high off the bat
  2. vovavili · 1790349337 · focus · HN ↗
    A consequence of a totally self-imposed handicap.
    vanviegen · 1790491515 · focus · HN ↗
    I get the feeling you're suggesting it's due to government regulation or 'socialist' policies.
    But no, this failure is due a mixture or privatisation and politicians looking no further than the next election, leading to structural underinvestment.
    Oh, and the energy transition going faster than even the most forward looking scenarios anticipated.
    FooBarWidget · 1790504535 · focus · HN ↗
    Going faster... until now. It's screetching to a halt. And they want us to get off gas in a few years while also being unable to handle the electrical load. I'm gonna buy a gas boiler thank you very much.
  3. radicalbyte · 1790463043 · focus · HN ↗
    AFAIK the problem in NL is due to chronic underinvestment in the grid infrastructure since the big privatisation wave. Combined with the heavy subsidy of industry causing the issues.
    Solvable but we need to be much smarter and redirect the fossil subsidies to reducing risk for grid-scale batteries and adding more grid capacity.
    rapnie · 1790469123 · focus · HN ↗
    I wonder. Had any privatisation in NL any net benefits for the population? Not talking shareholder revenues.
    vanviegen · 1790491076 · focus · HN ↗
    Of course not. The whole concept just doesn't make sense.
    microtonal · 1790493501 · focus · HN ↗
    In most areas it made things worse. One could argue that the only exception are ISPs/cellular operators. But for public transport, healthcare, energy, etc. I can't say it was an improvement.
    But yeah, we have one party that is most often in government that just loves privatisation, taxing workers more and the rich less, etc. and engages in a lot of short-term thinking. Apropos short-term thinking, one of them was a prime minister for 14 years and cut defense spending and did not even consider increasing spending when Russia invaded Crimea. And now he is the secretary general of NATO. Talking about failing upwards. Though he is probably primarily chosen for being able to communicate with Trump.
    radicalbyte · 1790530435 · focus · HN ↗
    Rutte can't even speak English properly.
    radicalbyte · 1790530394 · focus · HN ↗
    There's a possibility that the postal and telecoms systems did but I can't give you a counter. For everything else it has not been particularly effective; but a lot depends on what is privatised and how it's actually ran.
    Water. Energy. Public transport (which is partially privatised). Healthcare has been a disaster.
    Same thing for the UK but the results there were much much worse, especially the water (Brexit made it 10x worse). It was driven by the actions of the Unions in the 1970s (where they were taking the mickey) but of course went way way way too far. What was needed was to tweak the system such that the unions couldn't blackmail the Labour governments. Not to break it all up and sell it off for pennies on the dollar.
    crote · 1790529361 · focus · HN ↗
    Even worse: the right-wing politicians blocked all preemptive grid investments, as it would lead to "needlessly high" grid transport fees.
  4. nikanj · 1790492234 · focus · HN ↗
    We can’t let industry be built, because the power infrastructure is so shabby, because the state can’t afford to improve it, because the economy is in tatters, because there is no industry, because we can’t let industry be built

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.