Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

datacenterdynamics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 453 posts

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#251

Post by kragen »

xxpor wrote: post #245
kragen wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the US has its own supply of silicon. Toledo, Ohio, was called the "glass center of the world" in the 01930s because of the combination of cheap energy (natural gas), low freight rates, and the high-quality silicon-dioxide sand mined at Silica, Ohio, twelve miles to the west (10.2307/141587). The US is the world's leading producer of silica, producing about 100 million tonnes per year and exporting 4 million ( h…

They don't use silica sand to make semiconductors, they use quartzite. Which isn't available near near Toledo. There's plenty of other places in the US, but first you have to actually know the right mineral to look for.

You say, "They don't use silica sand to make semiconductors, they use quartzite." Even if this were true, quartzite is just silica sand that has been sintered together (naturally, underground). Moreover, Vince Beiser's Wired article (linked above) claims that in fact both high-purity silica sand and lump quartz (probably, as you say, quartzite) are used as sources of silicon.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#252

Post by seltzered_ »

awsthro00945 wrote: post #159
josaka wrote: post #69

After the TX grid failure last winter, it's probably not a coincidence that Samsung's new facility will be near ERCOT's operation center in Taylor, which manages the TX grid, and will likely be the last load to shed when the grid's stressed. Used to work in the Austin fab, and the amount of money lost per minute in a power failure is mind boggling. The tax breaks Taylor offered ($314m) are not that different from wha…

I really doubt proximity to the ERCOT center has anything to do with it. The new facility isn't close enough at all to the ERCOT center to be on the same grid segment. And with a new facility like this that is in the middle of a field outside of town, the new fab will be built on its own grid segment anyway, completely separate from the rest of Taylor and the ERCOT center. Taylor was chosen because that area (northea…

Do you have any thoughts on how water availability will be in the years/decades to come and how a fab would impact it and the communities depending on it?

My understanding is when you cross east past round rock towards Hutto/Taylor, the water aquifer being used changes to use water piped over from Carrizo-Wilcox aquifer.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#253

Post by throwaway95118 »

wonderwonder wrote: post #220
josaka wrote: post #69

After the TX grid failure last winter, it's probably not a coincidence that Samsung's new facility will be near ERCOT's operation center in Taylor, which manages the TX grid, and will likely be the last load to shed when the grid's stressed. Used to work in the Austin fab, and the amount of money lost per minute in a power failure is mind boggling. The tax breaks Taylor offered ($314m) are not that different from wha…

They are setting up fairly close to Tesla. Wonder if they are working on a deal for Tesla to provide battery backup. Interestingly enough Austin, TX appears to be rapidly approaching SF status as a tech hub and may soon surpass them. Its an interesting thing to watch and really gives insight into how politics and taxes affect business and growth.

I'm a big fan of Tesla and Mr. Musk - but does anyone know of any non-vaporware large scale industrial facilities that use Tesla battery walls as power backup? Do Tesla manufacturing plants do this?

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#254

Post by [deleted] »

jkestner wrote: post #227
bell-cot wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This...but did Samsung quietly negotiate a "any further energy supply f*ck-ups are 100% on YOUR dime" deal with the State of Texas, or what? By several accounts, the TX grid got darn close to collapse last winter - at which point "ERCOT Op Center is next door, and we get top priority" would not get you a single erg.

The going deal is, if there’s a power failure, we’ll let you recoup your costs from the taxpayers even as you profiteer. The governor can be bought for a very affordable $1 million. Certainly the incentives are aligned to solve this problem! https://www.texasobserver.org/after-kelcy-warrens-energy-tra...

[deleted]

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#255

Post by distribot »

shmatt wrote: post #243
nodicksplease wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

care to share any sources? or did you just make this up?

Yes, they made it up According to wikipedia/some google-fu SV has just above double the high tech jobs as Austin

That would be way more high tech jobs in Austin per capita.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#256

Post by samstave »

josaka wrote: post #69

After the TX grid failure last winter, it's probably not a coincidence that Samsung's new facility will be near ERCOT's operation center in Taylor, which manages the TX grid, and will likely be the last load to shed when the grid's stressed. Used to work in the Austin fab, and the amount of money lost per minute in a power failure is mind boggling. The tax breaks Taylor offered ($314m) are not that different from wha…

Two things:

Terrorist #1: FOCUS ON THAT PLANT ANT TAKE IT OUT!!

---

Second thing:

WHY THE FUCK ARENT THESE COMPANIES BUILDING THEIR OWN POWER PLANTS?

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#257

Post by vntx »

ecf wrote: post #59
JavaBatman wrote: post #11

I am still amazed by the shortsightedness of how these critical and strategic goods are off-shore. No wonder why the supply chains are fragile and not robust. It should be illegal for strategic goods and components such as chips and semiconductors to be produced offshore. Yes, it will raise prices in the short and medium-term, but it will make the domestic economy and manufacturing sector more robust, resilient to su…

The blame for this is purely on the shoulders of business leaders coming out of MBA programs across the US. It seems the only thing those places are teaching is how to join a company, strip it to the bone, hype up the short-term 5% growth, and get millions of dollars in raises.

I don’t like those MBAs anymore than you but blaming this group is disingenuous and an oversimplification. Business schools train people to profit, and if that comes at the cost of secure supply chains and national security, who cares, it’s not their problem. Someone else mentioned that this is a coordination problem, and I think that’s more accurate. You need governments to help fund these capital intensive ventures and incentives like tax-breaks and the fear of supply chain destroying pandemics to urge them on.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#258

Post by politician »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #184
politician wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just wrong. The White House recently identified semiconductors as an essential product critical to US national security [1]. These actions by the US and allies to onshore fabs is part of the adjustment to defuse a supply chain risk caused by potential future actions by China. During the Cold War, both sides used strategic release of classified information on capabilities to notify the war planners on the othe…

That's not what this is about. The US is sanctioning SMIC. It forced TSMC to release customer data of mainland Chinese customers, presumably with the goal of checking which more Chinese companies to sanction. The US's goal is to prevent China from building a self-sufficient semiconductor industry. Or conversely: to keep China dependent on the US so that the US can sanction China at any time.

Yes, SMIC looks like one aspect of a global reorganization of semiconductor manufacturing.

I’m not sure I buy your reasoning though. I don’t understand how effective blocking the use of US technology by SMIC will be given the propensity for IP theft, so I don’t see how it furthers the goal of preventing China from becoming self-sufficient. Nor would I really agree with the assumption that they are not already self-sufficient.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#259

Post by bumby »

tyingq wrote: post #222
ceejayoz wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The grid" tends to refer to more than just the transmission wires.

That seems unnecessarily sarcastic. I wasn't saying just the "wires". I was trying to shed more light on what the actual problem was.

Tbf, lots of people conflate transmission wires with "the grid". Even on a fairly tech-savvy forum like HN, I've read where people insinuate things like if all ICE vehicles were suddenly replaced with EV, all "the grid" would need is more wires running to charging stations.

Maybe people consider the grid distinct from all the supporting infrastructure.

Re: Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

#260

Post by jws »

shortstuffsushi wrote: post #113
0_____0 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

tangentially related bit of trivium... when i was house hunting a looked at a house across from a fire station, and upon doing research about what it's like to live across from one, found that a.) they tend not to blast sirens upon exiting the station, in contrast to living near a hospital with an ED, and b.) the power grid segments that fire stations are on have priority and are less likely to lose power during blac…

I wonder if the siren thing varies from location to location, a good friend of mine lived right next to one and it seemed you couldn't go 15 minutes without being drown out by them heading out.

My office is adjacent to a fire station. The policy has changed over the years. They used to use the sirens all the time. Now they almost never use the sirens when they leave. In a way that makes it more disturbing when they do, you know there's a reason.

Other things which are bothersome about a firehouse…

• They put the communications radio on some sort of loud speaker sometimes, so you get to listen to all the calls in the city.

• They have some sort of turbine that runs a lot. Maybe a hose dryer? I haven't gone to ask, but when I used to do audio recordings there were days we couldn't record because of it.

• Their backup generator optimizes efficiency by minimizing the muffler. The tests are pretty loud.

• The building department made me block up the windows on their side because I was too close to the property line and a fire might spread to the fire station. I say if the fire department can't keep fire from coming out my window and setting fire to their building 60 feet away, that's at least partly their fault. :-)

• They are a multi-tier bureaucracy. When their tree slowly fell over on to my building it took many months to get them to admit it was their tree and maybe they should cut it down. Lots of finger pointing between the fire department and various city levels and a few "dead parrot" conversations with different functionaries.

Post reply on HN