Live data from Hacker News

Samsung plans $17B chip plant in Taylor, Texas

datacenterdynamics.com

301–310 of 453 posts

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

#301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Can they get similar talent with draconian social policies like abortion bans? If I suggested moving to Texas my wife would (rightfully) tell me to go fuck myself." - I am very much against TX's policy on this. However, how many people are affected by this policy Vs how many kids will be denied Algebra in CA now? It is never 100% all good or bad policies in any place. It is always a mix. Rational people chose what's…

You're really comparing an abortion ban to delayed algebra? Also, that was just a single example. If you want to stick to education, Texas lawmakers have also been trying to push a book ban for public schools just this past month. There's also a bill targeting the concept of critical race theory that would ban curriculum where “an individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological d…

You're really comparing a state level abortion ban to delayed algebra?

Abortion at the state level is not something I would even consider in my list of priorities when choosing where to live when you can just drive to another state for a once in a lifetime event if you ever actually needed one. Public school systems are a whole other level though as your kids will deal with that daily.

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

#302
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is more about national security and business continuity than cost. Costs matter most when things are running smoothly. However, COVID has taught us a hard lesson. When SHTF, you better have a back up plan. Making money on IP alone while someone else handles all of the manufacturing and integration work looks great on a spreadsheet. Then some state actor cuts off the supply chain (or a virus) and your genius MBAs…

How is relying on a foreign company helping the situation?

For these risks physical location matters more than the organizational structure. If something (perhaps a conflict, perhaps something else) disrupts manufacturing or shipping around East Asia, supply from the Samsung fabs in Korea and TSMC fabs in Taiwan would be disrupted, but any manufacturing capacity that's physically located in the West would be still available.

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

#303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-03-08/tesla-is-...

Not quite what you were asking about but it does deal with the TX grid.

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

#304

Texas is the new choice for multinationals, they seem to be doing something right or is it that some states are a mess?

>> Samsung spent years evaluating where to build the new fab, courting multiple locations and pitting them against each other for better incentives

Perhaps other states are not willing to top the gobs of money Texas offered to Samsung. The Amazon HQ2, race-to-the-bottom strategy is alive and well

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

#305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Newer fabs like this recycle a huge portion of their water. I did some back of the napkin math a few weeks ago and the amount of water that the fab will be drawing (after accounting for the recycling) will be about the same as the water usage of an equivalently-sized suburban neighborhood. So while water usage is definitely a concern, I'm not sure that this fab is a bigger concern than your typical neighborhoods or farms.

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

#308
post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

key phrase: > a full chip supply chain in the country (emphasis mine) TSMC is, after all, ALSO building a fab in the country, so it's not like TSMC doesn't believe in onshoring chips to the US. The fabs are {high capital expense/high recurring expense/high skilled labor} operations so the US is very competitive due to the labor value-add. Not every part of the full supply chain is like that. To serve (aka reduce risk…

This was mentioned in the last meeting held by Biden with the North America group. The Mexican president said that the imports from China should be reduced as much as possible in order to stop China becoming more powerful that it already is. Mexico at least in the mid/near future is a safe bet in terms of supply chain risk.

Maquiladoras (near the border) are even more resistant to supply chain risk

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

#310
post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Morris Chang has been exceptionally clear He can be "exceptionally clear" and still biased in favor of TMSC. > It is impossible with respect to current cost structure Well, we'll have to pay a few cents (or dollars) more per chip then. It is infeasible for us to continue to depend on TMSC in the long term - it will be taken over by our largest geopolitical adversary by 2030 at the latest. We do not have a choice bu…

On the other hand, from the perspective of TSMC, if production does not get transferred to USA mainland, then it secures the future of TSMC because in that case USA will ensure that they do not get taken over by a geopolitical adversary in the coming decade. Geopolitical risk is not something external that exists in isolation; the location of semiconductor manufacturing is a big factor that shapes the geopolitical ri…

> in that case USA will ensure that they do not get taken over by a geopolitical adversary in the coming decade

How will the USA ensure that?

Post reply on HN