←back to thread

437 points adventured | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
JohnJamesRambo ◴[] No.27161334[source]
I have no knowledge of the situation, why did they choose Arizona?
replies(7): >>27161341 #>>27161375 #>>27161385 #>>27161388 #>>27161398 #>>27161454 #>>27161661 #
mediaman ◴[] No.27161454[source]
Interestingly this came as a loss to Washington, where there is already a significant fab owned by TSMC called WaferTech. Their facility is on the WA side of the Portland suburbs.

Many felt WA was in the running because of the talent already there.

This caused concerns that the future of the WaferTech fab facility is dimmer than before, since it probably makes less sense to pump billions more into it in the future.

replies(4): >>27161611 #>>27161716 #>>27161808 #>>27162442 #
magicsmoke ◴[] No.27162442[source]
Also surprising is that TSMC was recently hit by water shortages due to a drought in Taiwan. Arizona isn't exactly drought resistant, yet they built there instead of rainy Washington.
replies(2): >>27162602 #>>27162752 #
baybal2 ◴[] No.27162752[source]
There was a few hours long blackout in Taiwan today night, that was way beyond the time UPSes can last.

Expect last 6 month worth of wafers in production to go down the drain in fabs which relied on battery backups only.

replies(1): >>27162968 #
Alupis ◴[] No.27162968[source]
The backup power supplies for these types of facilities are actually generators powered off gasoline or diesel, not just batteries, and can theoretically run forever (or at least as much fuel you can get).
replies(1): >>27162994 #
1. baybal2 ◴[] No.27162994[source]
You cannot backup power a whole modern fab, unless you build a small power station just for it.

UPSes there are just to keep cleanroom clean, and most critical processes which can't be gracefully shut down.

replies(1): >>27163252 #
2. neltnerb ◴[] No.27163252[source]
Although at these scales, a CCP at 400MW output is "only" ~$300M, so building that small power station might not be that big a deal compared with the cost of turning off?
replies(1): >>27163475 #
3. baybal2 ◴[] No.27163475[source]
I believe things are moving progressively in this direction.