Thread

1. 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. tgsovlerkhgsel · 1790459697 · focus · HN ↗

      What is so energy consuming around fabs? The light source? I always thought of these as high-precision, not-too-high-volume processes and would have expected energy requirements to be lower than e.g. a car factory (or similar to e.g. a mall) and completely negligible on a national grid scale or compared to something like a smelter or lignite mine.

      Edit: AI claims HVAC and air filtering/handling can be 40-50% of energy usage. Plus a megawatt per EUV scanner (ok, the latter matches what I would have guessed, but compared to the 16 MW of a single large bucket wheel excavator or estimates I've seen for large shopping malls, that's not that insane either).

      1. whateverboat · 1790463974 · focus · HN ↗

         TSMC's Arizona fab needs 200MW of electricity.

         But even more importantly, they need 2 separate completely independent substation feeds, since a 15 second interruption can cause 0.1B Euro of losses.

         Finally, and here is where Europe really really suffers, generally you need these things to be planned, approved and built within a year.

         1. selestify · 1790490330 · focus · HN ↗

            Why would the turnaround time need to be so small?

            1. tormeh · 1790518833 · focus · HN ↗

               Why suffer worse bureaucracy than you absolutely have to? As long as there are no trade barriers companies will go where circumstances are the most favorable. What's the argument in favor of settling in Europe?

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.