• Home
  • About
  • Reports
    • EU commission 450mm Report (2012)
    • EEMI White Paper (2012)
    • 450mm SEMI EPWG Report – Japanese Version (2008)
    • 450mm SEMI EPWG Report – English Version (2008)
    • 450mm Wright Williams & Kelly
    • 300mm Intel
    • 200mm to 300mm SEMI / SEMATECH Report (1995)
    • 200mm JEIDA Report
  • Activities
    • Global 450mm Consortium
    • SEMI: Standards Status
    • ISMI
    • Europe: EEMI-450

450mm funding opposition in New York state

February 08, 2010
by John
300, 300mm, 450, 450mm, Albany, CNSE, funding, New York, opposition, SEMATECH, State
1 Comment

In an article in Semiconductor International, a group in New York apparently has gotten word of a proposal to the State of New York for funding for 450mm development and has expressed their opposition.  In the article, the group expresses concern that the funding for 450mm research and development would not benefit companies doing business or manufacturing inside New York State.

With College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering (CNSE) and SEMATECH being centers of research in New York State, it would seem that funding for research in 450mm to occur would be a natural request.  However, the opposition has an interesting argument in their concern about lack of benefits for New York residents.  Previous government funding efforts in the US, including the original SEMATECH effort in the mid-to-late 1980’s had significant, direct benefit for the constituents being taxed for the funding.  These benefits were much easier to argue at a national level – and funding was therefore nationalistic in nature.  Additionally, “in-kind contribution” by the donation of facilities by the University of Texas, had direct benefit for the local and state economy.  Funding from New York State has a more difficult direct value proposition for its constituents unless one of the proponents, makes a legitimate commitment to construct a 450mm fab in the state.

To date, we haven’t been informed of any government-funded projects for 450mm research and development.  There has been a call from the European Commission for proposals that could include such funding; however, there is no positive news on actual funding from Europe yet.  Funding for 450mm research in Europe might seem to stand at odds with the prospect of there ever being a 450mm fab owned by a European chipmaker.  However, when viewed from the aspect of keeping their suppliers in the running for eventual 450mm orders, if and when they occur, does add some logic to the prospect.

Identifying specific research and development projects that would benefit both 300mm fabs and potential 450mm fabs would be the most prudent use of ever scarce R&D resources if one were to propose 450mm R&D funding.  Some of these might include studies to improve the speed of lithography scanning, ion implant, and inspection, as only one example.  Speeding these steps up improves the manufacturing effectiveness of existing fabs, and addresses one of the largest productivity bottlenecks facing 450mm – the speed at which “beam” tools can process a given amount of area per hour.

The deeper question in all of this is “What about the impact to the market itself?”  Funding for basic research can help a nascent industry to evolve.  However, 450mm doesn’t really fall in the realm of basic, university-based research.  And it clearly benefits just a few chipmakers (3 to be exact).  Some companies, such as IBM and GLOBALFOUNDARIES, who either have or are building a fab in New York, actually stand to be hurt by 450mm if they are not able to afford a estimated $US 10B fab if and when the industry transitions.  Additionally, no major OEMs with manufacturing facilities inside New York would benefit.  Granted, the “tens of millions” of dollars mentioned in the article will not go a long way towards the estimated $US 25B needed in research funding, but should the State of New York be in the business of picking winners (those who can afford a 450mm fab), particularly if the winners and known to not reside in the state?

So, what do you think?  Should the State of New York fund 450mm development?

Related Posts

  • $1.8B Makes 450mm Real
  • The economic realities of 450mm
  • Batch Czochralski Processing: Some Cold, Hard Truths
  • Standing out from the Crowd on 450mm
  • Future Fab Partners with CNSE / G450C
Social Share
  • google-share
One Comment
  1. J Olson 02/13/2010 at 9:11 pm Reply

    The State of New York should nix the deal if there is no economic benefit to the citizens of New York. Its their money.

    I am tired of seeing government officials barter our cash away like candy to little boys. This consortium – its members – know all too well the fiscal games to play and strings to pull for funding. These companies have evolved to a level of annual revenue that rivals the GOP of many countries yet they are free to ravage an economy with autonomy that leaves them void of any allegiance to the State of New York, our country, its citizens, and citizens around the world. The global economy has evolved but its ethics are void of local concern and stewardship of the citizens of New York.

    Stewardship for the Semiconductor industry in general is suffering because of the push for 450 mm wafers. When these billions of dollars can go to more 300 mm fabs, optimizing 200 mm equipment, and evaluating business models to support green economies of scale (solar power for instance). Why doesn’t this consortium do something that will benefit the greater good of the semiconductor industry? Rather than tossing 10 billion dollars on a fab, inject the money into infrastructure for existing fabs.

    Companies supplying the 450 mm equipment industry experience significant costs to R&D and the general push for 450 mm fab means less equipment net sales and hence does not promote a global economy but rather an economy of scale. In this objective there is no job growth for society. Hoping that 450mm wafers will “catch on” or take hold is simply unintelligent notion. Also the employee base for 450 mm wafers shrinks, there is less tax base for a fab, and therefore there will be negligable return to a community that supports its integration.

    When these fabs come online and dump chips on the market they leave voids in niche markets for existing fabs to fill. The notion of a 450 mm fab benefits the few, serves only an economy of scale, and erodes stability in the job market at a time when jobs are hard to come by.

    Kudos to New York in their opposition.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

*
*

Search 450mm.com


Most Viewed Articles

  • Caution Ahead for 450mm? - 17,619 views
  • A Plan Coming Together: 450mm Patterned Wafers - 12,893 views
  • Schrödinger’s 450mm Cat – Dead or Alive? - 11,745 views
  • The 450mm Transition’s Dirty Little Secret - 11,403 views
  • 450mm Test Wafers, a Path Forward? - 10,988 views

Recent Comments

  • John Ellis on The 450mm Transition’s Dirty Little Secret
  • Tom Foremski on The 450mm Transition’s Dirty Little Secret
  • Israel Beinglass on The 450mm Transition’s Dirty Little Secret

450mm Industry News

  • Global FOUP Load Port Market to achieve Significant Growth | TDK, Brooks Automation, Kensington, MEIKIKOU, Genmark Automation (Nidec) - Jumbo News
  • Semiconductor Silicon Wafer Market 2020-2027 – How the Market Will Witness Substantial Growth in the Upcoming years Shin Etsu (JP), Sumco (JP), Siltronic (DE) - Jumbo News
  • Global Semiconductor Silicon Wafer Market, Industry Size, Share, Market Production, Pricing, Global Revenue 2018-2020 Import and Export Figures, and SWOT Analysis - Jumbo News
  • Semiconductor Load Port Modules Market 2021 Huge Demand, Increasing Growth and Future Scope with Top Companies:Brooks, TDK, Kensington, Hirata, MEIKIKOU, Genmark Automation, Inc., RORZE, Hung Ching Development - Splash Radio Wales
  • The Semiconductor Silicon Wafer Market Size for Exploding, Know What's Behind This Growth, and What Semiconductor Silicon Wafer Markets Are Leading the Way? : Shin Etsu (JP), Sumco (JP), MEMC (US), LG Siltron (KR), Siltronic (DE), etc - SoccerNurds

Posts by Category

  • Analysis (9)
  • Commentary (21)
  • Cost / Benefit Discussion (23)
  • EDA (1)
  • Equipment (9)
  • Events (1)
  • General (18)
  • Government (10)
  • History (5)
  • In the Press (45)
  • Materials (4)
  • Standards (4)
  • Timing (20)
  • Uncategorized (1)
Copyright 2008 - 2017, Blue Mustang, LLC. All rights reserved.