[HN Gopher] Closure of 3M chip coolant plant could upset semicon...
___________________________________________________________________
Closure of 3M chip coolant plant could upset semiconductor sector
Author : tomohawk
Score : 54 points
Date : 2022-04-10 17:16 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (taipeitimes.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (taipeitimes.com)
| DSingularity wrote:
| Is out true that this one factory is the source of 80% of all
| semiconductor manufacturing coolant? This sounds horrendous.
| javajosh wrote:
| Sure, but I bet there are a lot of things like that. It's
| probably even a "reverse power law", and something that
| neoliberal capitalism is actually really good at dealing with.
| I bet right now this minute there is a lot of money talking
| about what it would take to spin up an alternative, not because
| they're nice, but because there are big profits available when
| demand is high, and supply low.
| arrosenberg wrote:
| You did a great job of making the case against neoliberal
| capitalism. Why should anyone tolerate a system that
| incentivizes hostage taking? It makes far more sense to have
| a working government that goes "hey, we need to diversify
| this sector" and creates the proper incentives for capital to
| chase.
| csdvrx wrote:
| > It makes far more sense to have a working government that
| goes "hey, we need to diversify this sector" and creates
| the proper incentives for capital to chase.
|
| Except governments have no incentive to look at such
| opportunities in advances.
|
| A capitalist company has a profit motive to look at
| everything that can go wrong, and react accordingly and
| quickly.
|
| See the MTT GPU as an example of such response: they bought
| PowerVR when it made sense to.
|
| Now GPUs are in shortage because there are priced too low,
| because they have only 2 manufacturers who don't want to
| get a bad reputation of "predatory pricing".
|
| New entrants may care less, and even a GPU that's only
| competitive to the 1070 may sell if it's more easily
| available.
|
| I do not think a bailout of PowerVR would have had such
| results. It may also have come with strings attached,
| reducing the flexibility needed.
| wonnage wrote:
| I remember reading something similar with China's dominance
| of rare earth elements - the US has plenty of mines but it
| costs too much to mine them _and_ the entire rest of the
| supply chain is in China, so there's not much domestic demand
| Borrible wrote:
| Rare earths aren't rare, they're dirty.
|
| But the Chinese don't care. One reason why they can offer
| them cheaper. No one cares how the stuff is produced there.
| Expendable environment, expendable worker.
|
| https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/rare-earth-
| eleme...
| sschueller wrote:
| You can't tell me they didn't have enough time to switch to an
| alternative. Such environmental regulations takes time and don't
| just show out of the blue.
|
| Maybe we should be asking how toxic is this coolant that such a
| plant was forced closed by new regulations?
| tomohawk wrote:
| It would be great if you could dig up more information to back
| up this assertion instead of just assuming motives and facts
| not in evidence.
| nickff wrote:
| Creating a new option, certifying it for different processes,
| and getting it into full production takes a long time and costs
| a lot of money. The semiconductor industry has made a variety
| of inconvenient changes (I.e. photoresists) in the past for the
| purpose of reducing toxicity.
|
| I suspect that this is a more challenging problem than you
| think.
| madengr wrote:
| amelius wrote:
| Also raises the question: if 3M can't contain the stuff, then
| how can we be sure that Asian fabs can?
| bsder wrote:
| There is a big difference between containing 10 gallons and
| containing 10 tons.
|
| There is also a big difference between containing the product
| and _manufacturing_ the product.
|
| To be fair, it doesn't sound like 3M was trying very hard to
| contain this--they mostly seemed to just be dragging their
| feet and doing business as usual.
| gopalv wrote:
| > Maybe we should be asking how toxic is this coolant that such
| a plant was forced closed by new regulations?
|
| The article says PFAS, but I'm going to guess it is
| Flourinert[1].
|
| The whole thing about fluorinated hydrocarbons is that it can't
| burn through oxidation.
|
| Probably a very hard thing to swap out without compromises on
| fire hazard or corrosion.
|
| [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorinert
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| They can burn, they just break down very slowly (PFAS half-
| life's can range by over 5 orders of magnitude depending on
| the type).
| legulere wrote:
| Wikipedia lists FC-70, FC-72 and FC-75 as compounds of
| Flourinert. With my limited school understanding of chemistry
| those all look like they have perfluoroalkyl-parts and
| therefore fall under the PFAS definition.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| Extremely pure fluorine-based gas is used as dry etchant to
| produce gas phase SiF4 during pattern etching.
|
| Periodic table does not have many alternatives to fluorine :)
|
| Waste can be dealt with, but society needs a good tariff system
| to prevent groups from bypassing costs...
| ceejayoz wrote:
| "If we refuse to do anything, they'll have to back down."
| ars wrote:
| That's the thing - it's not very toxic, that's why it's used.
|
| But it's toxic enough that when it builds up it causes problems
| that are very difficult to detect.
|
| Finding a less toxic alternative isn't easy - it took decades
| to discover the toxicity of the current chemical, specifically
| because its toxicity is so low.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| _Finding a less toxic alternative isn 't easy - it took
| decades to discover the toxicity of the current chemical,
| specifically because it's toxicity is so low._
|
| Maybe, just maybe, and work with me here, it's _not that big
| a deal._ Treating everything as if it were plutonium isn 't a
| sustainable way to move humanity forward.
|
| Anathema to the EU's way of thinking, certainly... yet
| defensible from an objective point of view.
| darkmarmot wrote:
| The problem is that it virtually never goes away, keeps
| building up in the environment, and results in ever greater
| levels of toxicity over time.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| What would be a good resource to look up symptoms of
| fluorocarbon toxicity? Unless/until you burn them, my
| understanding is that these are some of the most
| chemically-inert substances in common use.
| bsder wrote:
| Is the problem the end chemical or the intermediary waste
| stream?
|
| Even if the end result is inert, there are probably a _LOT_
| of waste byproducts that are pretty nasty--this is fluorine
| chemistry, after all.
|
| If the site is just dumping those, that's going to be bad.
| laydn wrote:
| At this point, it feels like chipmakers are just eager to find
| yet another excuse to slow down production.
|
| This plant closure appears to have been in the works for several
| years so it is unfathomable that the chipmakers are not prepared
| for this.
| BaseballPhysics wrote:
| For context, this has been going on for quite some time.
|
| As this article notes, the problem itself has been known for 4-5
| years now:
|
| June 2021: https://www.brusselstimes.com/news/belgium-all-
| news/175007/p...
|
| > Flashback: In 2017, a chemical known as PFOS was found to have
| been discharged from the 3M plant into the soil. The discovery
| was made when works started on the Oosterweel project, a massive
| public works project designed to complete the Antwerp ring-road
| on the western side, to link the port to the motorways network.
|
| > The discovery was made by the contractor BAM, now known as
| Lantis, and an agreement was reached with 3M on how to proceed.
|
| Goodness knows how they could go 4-5 years only to discover that
| the planned remediation, which they were only set to start
| putting in place in July of last year, was not allowed under
| their environmental regulations.
|
| Next, September 2021: https://www.startribune.com/3m-under-fire-
| in-belgium-over-co...
|
| > The notice essentially warns 3M that Flanders deems the company
| to be violating its environmental regulations, and demands that
| 3M engage with its regulators to discuss remediation, abatement
| and the creation of a fund to pay for environmental damages and
| potential health damages.
|
| November 2021: https://www.morningstar.com/news/dow-
| jones/202111014178/3m-s...
|
| > 3M Co. on Monday said it has idled some production at a plant
| in Belgium after the Flemish environmental agency issued a safety
| measure barring emissions of certain toxic chemicals from the
| facility.
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| >Goodness knows how they could go 4-5 years only to discover
| that the planned remediation, which they were only set to start
| putting in place in July of last year, was not allowed under
| their environmental regulations.
|
| Because what is and isn't allowed depends a lot on whether your
| paperwork crosses the bureaucrat's desk just before lunch on
| Monday or just after lunch on Friday.
|
| They probably had all sorts of preliminary oks and then got
| denied at the 11th hour because internal political winds
| changed in whatever office they were dealing with.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-04-10 23:01 UTC)