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

TSMC ups Arizona investment from $12B to $40B with second semi fab

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 294 posts

Re: TSMC ups Arizona investment from $12B to $40B with second semi fab

#121

Post by throwaway4good »

The geopolitical context for this is wild; and in some ways is Taiwan selling its crown jewels and sacrifying its strategic relevance for unclear returns.

https://asiatimes.com/2022/12/us-mulls-scorched-earth-strate...

US mulls scorched earth strategy for Taiwan

US strategy to blow up Taiwan’s semiconductor fabs to deter China might do more harm than good

The US is mulling disabling or destroying Taiwan’s semiconductor factories in the event of a Chinese invasion. This stark change raises questions about its capabilities and commitment to defend the island.

Re: TSMC ups Arizona investment from $12B to $40B with second semi fab

#122

Post by totalZero »

thehappypm wrote: post #101
totalZero wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would make more sense to put the mega-fabs where electricity is cheapest in the Americas, and that certainly isn't Arizona.

Isn’t solar the cheapest energy per KwH? A sunny place like Arizona with tons of empty space should be able to cheaply deploy lots of energy.

I think that depends how much build-out you have to do in order to install the kind of capacity required for a $40B semiconductor fab, which would hypothetically need some kind of major energy storage infrastructure or backup source in the event that solar is the main source of electricity.

> Large semiconductor fabs use as much as 100 megawatt-hours of power each hour, which is more than many automotive plants or oil refineries do. [0]

If a fab is running at that consumption rate for twenty hours every day for one year, it will consume approximately all of Arizona's 735,000 MWh of annual utility-scale solar, wind, and geothermal net electricity generation. [1]

Contrast that with the annual hydroelectric generation of Itaipu Dam in South America, at 79,440,000 MWh in 2019. [2]

[0] https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/dotcom/client_serv... [pdf]

[1] https://www.eia.gov/state/print.php?sid=AZ

[2] https://www.power-technology.com/projects/itaipu-hydroelectr...

Re: TSMC ups Arizona investment from $12B to $40B with second semi fab

#123

Post by Animatronio »

brookst wrote: post #97
Animatronio wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now please explain why would the US send troops to defend TW if there's nothing actually valuable there anymore? Ukraine was hugely important for it's position next to Russia, and so is TW. And still, no US troops on the ground in Ukraine, and there won't be any in TW. This is a smart way of giving up on TW without actually admitting it, and there's nothing to be ashamed of, really.

You seem to be asserting a few contradictory things: 1. Taiwan can only be defended with US troops on the ground 2. Ukraine has no US troops on the ground and is being successfully defended 3. The US would only put troops on the ground to protect valuable things like TSMC fabs 4. (by implication) if China attacks Taiwan and destroys TSMC fabs tomorrow, the US would have no incentive to defend Taiwan because the fabs…

1. The topic was US defense of TW. How exactly would it be defended by the US without troops? 2. Ukraine is defended by the Ukr army - with copious amounts of ammo and weaponry yes from NATO but no troops. At the same time the US never said they would send the army into conflict to defend it; when it comes to TW, despite the strategic ambiguity or whatever it's called, the general belief is there would be US boots on the ground. 3. The US would send its soldiers if there was something valuable obviously - be it fabs or oil or whatever, but not just to fight China for a random island in the Pacific. Otherwise they would have done it already on the countless atolls that are being fortified. 4. Yes, pretty much that. Just that it would not be obvious, but rather a long war of words would precede it... Again, nothing wrong with it. As long as no lives are lost I guess it is for the better.

Re: TSMC ups Arizona investment from $12B to $40B with second semi fab

#124

Post by dharbin »

dsr3 wrote: post #52
_8j50 wrote: post #45

Don't these fabs need like an insane amount of water? Why would they build it of all places in arizona which as far as I know barely meets drinking water requirements (at least at some cities) and is basically mostly a desert?

Some people said because Arizona is in relatively stable seismic region in the US. But I don't buy it. TSMC fab in Taiwan is also located in seismic prone region. Compared to the cost of the fab itself, seismic isolation system is relatively affordable.

I heard a story about an Intel fab in Arizona that would always produce bad silicon at a certain time a day. After some investigations it was determined that a train passed by at that time every day causing enough seismic activity to disrupt the manufacturing process.

Re: TSMC ups Arizona investment from $12B to $40B with second semi fab

#125

Post by [deleted] »

throwaway4good wrote: post #121

The geopolitical context for this is wild; and in some ways is Taiwan selling its crown jewels and sacrifying its strategic relevance for unclear returns. https://asiatimes.com/2022/12/us-mulls-scorched-earth-strate... US mulls scorched earth strategy for Taiwan US strategy to blow up Taiwan’s semiconductor fabs to deter China might do more harm than good The US is mulling disabling or destroying Taiwan’s semiconduct…

[deleted]

Re: TSMC ups Arizona investment from $12B to $40B with second semi fab

#126

Post by CydeWeys »

totalZero wrote: post #122
thehappypm wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t solar the cheapest energy per KwH? A sunny place like Arizona with tons of empty space should be able to cheaply deploy lots of energy.

I think that depends how much build-out you have to do in order to install the kind of capacity required for a $40B semiconductor fab, which would hypothetically need some kind of major energy storage infrastructure or backup source in the event that solar is the main source of electricity. > Large semiconductor fabs use as much as 100 megawatt-hours of power each hour, which is more than many automotive plants or oi…

> Large semiconductor fabs use as much as 100 megawatt-hours of power each hour

Ooof, this kind of writing where the author doesn't understand units just gets my goat. Just say it uses 100 MW! Geez.

Re: TSMC ups Arizona investment from $12B to $40B with second semi fab

#127

Post by CHY872 »

adam_arthur wrote: post #78
conradev wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Onshoring in this case is a logical result of improved tax incentives. Almost every cost is higher in the US – not just labor. Improved automation does reduce costs, but those cost reductions are even better in places where manufacturing is already cheap. Semiconductors have a very high value to weight ratio, so shipping them globally makes more sense than it does for other items.

The cost difference between US and China for a fully automated factory is negligible. Even considering real estate costs and taxes. No tax incentive needed to onshore in the long run

While semiconductor fabs are highly automated, the machines are complex enough and do extreme enough things that they break a lot, requiring human intervention. MTBF for many of the machines used can be measured in hours, it's not like you can set up and go home. TSMC has around 65k employees overall - a cursory search did not yield their makeup by job breakdown, although from 1997 through 2003 around 50% of their employees were 'factory' workers via [0].

I'd expect high-margin items like semiconductors to be more amenable to onshoring anywhere - certainly Intel has almost all of its fabs in highly developed countries, but I think this is hardly a cost efficiency move - rather it's a hedge against the failure of globalization and the risk of the US losing access to advanced semiconductor technology in case of strife in Taiwan. Russia has already lost this access. TSMC took in about $56B in '21, of which about $28B was 'cost of revenue', the amount they needed to spend on supporting this revenue (marketing, legal, production, e.g., not building factories or R&D). There's certainly room for increased production costs while maintaining a profit.

[0] - https://www.researchgate.net/figure/TSMC-personnel-structure...

Re: TSMC ups Arizona investment from $12B to $40B with second semi fab

#129

Post by thehappypm »

totalZero wrote: post #122
thehappypm wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t solar the cheapest energy per KwH? A sunny place like Arizona with tons of empty space should be able to cheaply deploy lots of energy.

I think that depends how much build-out you have to do in order to install the kind of capacity required for a $40B semiconductor fab, which would hypothetically need some kind of major energy storage infrastructure or backup source in the event that solar is the main source of electricity. > Large semiconductor fabs use as much as 100 megawatt-hours of power each hour, which is more than many automotive plants or oi…

Here is a solar plant in California, which broke ground over a decade ago, that produces 550 MW of power, for $2.5B. Build even a small version of one of these and its 100 MW power needs are met.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topaz_Solar_Farm

Re: TSMC ups Arizona investment from $12B to $40B with second semi fab

#130

Post by richardwhiuk »

adam_arthur wrote: post #63

Onshoring is a logical result of improved automation. When labor costs lessen, transportation and logistics become the primary concern. Wouldn’t be surprised if 100 years from now most final good assembly is done locally. Of course sometimes raw materials and inputs are more expensive to transport than the finished good, so there will always be cases where long distance transportation of finished products is still pr…

This isn't onshoring - onshoring would be moving to Taiwan - this is the Taiwanese Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation.
Post reply on HN