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

131–140 of 294 posts

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

#131

Post by zdw »

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.

There's also a nuclear plant nearby in AZ:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Verde_Nuclear_Generating_...

Nuclear + Solar seems like it would be a pretty ideal mix in a hot climate, especially given that peak demand for air conditioning coincides with solar maximum output, and Nuclear could handle some of the base/overnight load.

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

#132

Post by bcrosby95 »

Mistletoe wrote: post #89
coredog64 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Farmers are selling their farmland to developers who then turn it into housing. Everyone wins: Residential water use is significantly lower than agricultural, the farmers get rich, and more housing is being built.

Should people live in an area with no water? It feels like we have so many problems caused by people just not living in the locations in the USA where there is lots of rainfall and water. I have tons of water, my state just uses lakes filled by rainwater. We make electricity with it too. https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Average_precipitat... I always find it interesting that people keep cramming into the wes…

Should people live in an area that needs to burn fossil fuels for heating? Energy efficient heat pumps, which AC is, only work on a relatively narrow band of temperature differentials. You can't really use them in freezing conditions.

There's lots of hand wringing about living in hot, dry climates. It's just odd to me because where people live, in general, are not particularly amenable to the number of humans living there.

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

#133

Post by tony_cannistra »

adam_arthur wrote: post #118
tony_cannistra wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to break it to you, but your "economically illiterate people" might actually understand some fundamental social and political realities that you've not yet had the chance to reckon with. Not to mention the physical realities of water resources. Your comparison to oil pipelines is nonsense. Where to start: privatization, a global commodity market, relative scarcity, massive extractive capex.... Sure, we built o…

Why would we practice conservation when we can spend $30-50B in capex amortized over 50 years via marginally higher taxes on the populace with minimal opex to solve the problem permanently? Thats why they are economically illiterate. The obvious and more cost effective choice will win in the end, and it doesn’t involve austerity and suffering and repentance for high water use

Because it wouldn't solve the problem permanently.

The folks who wrote the Colorado River Compact thought they were solving the problem of dividing the river's water permanently, too. They made it worse.

I don't disagree that economics are a critical part of this conversation. But I don't understand how you're making the argument that enabling more water use, not less, is cost effective.

Even amortized across 50 years, $30B is more than the $0B required if we just use less water.

None of this even comes anywhere near discussing the potential deleterious ecological (and economic!) impacts of draining water-rich ecosystems by piping their water elsewhere. Look to the phase-out of leaded gasoline as a great example of how externalities matter.

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

#134

Post by boc »

Animatronio wrote: post #72
boc wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or conversely the US will commit even more resources to the defense of Taiwan now that their own domestic supply of chips is safe. The US had no strategic interest in Ukraine yet we’ve all seen the reaction. The US will gladly defend Taiwan and create the hill for the CCP to die upon.

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.

The US isn’t giving up Taiwan- it’s the perfect opportunity to humiliate the CCP. China is in way over their heads if they actually believe they can achieve a naval landing on a fortified island without air superiority. It would be an absolute massacre.

Additionally, the US could simply embargo Chinese supply lines and dare them to engage.

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

#135

Post by icey »

fooker wrote: post #83
icey wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For at least part of this, ASML has had a large facility in the Phoenix metro (Tempe) for quite a few years. Assuming that's one of the Dutch companies you're referring to. TSMC is going to benefit from the microchip industry that's already in Phoenix thanks to Intel's enormous presence here.

What are some of the companies in the microchip industry in/around Phoenix?

There are a lot: https://www.chipsetc.com/semiconductor-companies-in-arizona....

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

#136

Post by mikeyouse »

adam_arthur wrote: post #119
NikolaNovak wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Oil pipelines have already proven the economic viability. For oil . Water has far lower value density.

For water. Its proven we can build many thousand miles of pipeline for 10s of billions. Which is vastly cheap enough and sufficient to solve this problem. Much cheaper than alternatives

I love how arm chair engineers have solved the water crises in the south by suggesting people "just build pipelines!".

Just the lack of understanding of like 15 different aspects of the problem with that idea and the confidence to defend regardless is kind of amazing.

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

#138

Post by philliphaydon »

starkd wrote: post #48
FpUser wrote: post #12

I guess this is TSMCs getaway if things will get sour with China.

I think it makes it more likely that China is going to swallow up Taiwan without even firing a shot. Wargame simulations are giving a dim prospect for defending the island. US has removed fighter jets from Japan. And public opinion in Taiwan for resisting China has slightly shifted toward accomadation. I hope I am wrong.

> And public opinion in Taiwan for resisting China has slightly shifted toward accomadation.

Huh? No it hasn’t. Taiwan doesn’t want to end up like Hong kong. They know the 1 country 2 systems doesn’t exist. Taiwan is already an independent country. They just want to keep status quo so China will leave them alone.

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

#139

Post by StreamBright »

zdw wrote: post #131
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.

There's also a nuclear plant nearby in AZ: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Verde_Nuclear_Generating_... Nuclear + Solar seems like it would be a pretty ideal mix in a hot climate, especially given that peak demand for air conditioning coincides with solar maximum output, and Nuclear could handle some of the base/overnight load.

It is but you also need controllable components with the ability to quickly change output performance when building solar as your peak source. Usually this means gas turbines, in some cases this could also mean battery.

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

#140

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

_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?

They need a lot of water initially but recycle it as they operate.

Intel and ASML already have facilities in Arizona. I'd assume TSMC chose partly based on that allowing them to hire out of the local talent pool, along with incentives from the state.

Post reply on HN