Slashdot Mirror


The Environmental Cost of Silicon Chips

Col. Panic writes "Scientific American is running a small story about the amount of material required to produce silicon chips and the potential hazards of associated toxic chemicals." This combined with coltan mining processes sure paints a dark picture of the chip industry.

13 of 201 comments (clear)

  1. Re:save some for the fishies!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The water is used in coffee, Coke and other caffeinated drinks by the nerds who design the chips.

  2. The chemicals by wiredog · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I used to do programming for automated process lines used in the circuit board industry and quartz chip fabs (the chips used for timing purposes). One of the chemicals used is HF, since that's about the only thing that will etch silicon, which is really nasty. Also used are H2SO4, potassium permanganate, and other fun chemicals.

    Important safety note: When working in such a place, always wash your hands up to the elbows before going to the bathroom, or rubbing your eyes. I've been told that sulfuric on the willy is an unforgettable experience...

    1. Re:The chemicals by Zathrus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Important safety note: When working in such a place, always wash your hands up to the elbows before going to the bathroom, or rubbing your eyes. I've been told that sulfuric on the willy is an unforgettable experience...

      Where on earth did you work with such shitty fab safety that you were likely to get any of those chemicals on you?

      I've worked in fabs too, and wrote software to control PVD/CVD and etchers. When I started the job I went to about a week worth of fab safety classes where they scared the hell out of you from doing stupid things with chemicals. Probably my favorite line was "if you hear the gas alarm, leave the chemical storage room immediately. If you choose to linger, at least try to die within 6 feet of the door, because that's how long the hook is to drag your body out."

      The chemicals being used in modern fabs are, indeed, incredibly, ungodly nasty. HF, arsenic, H2SO4, etc are the tip of the iceberg. We couldn't wear contacts in the fab because of a cleaning chemical in the floor with the trade name Pirhana. If something ever went wrong and the fans backblasted, Pirhana would melt plastic - and thus your contacts. To your eyes. So we got safety glasses. There were gasses in use that would kill you before they could be detected.

      The point of all this is that safety procedures were taken very, very seriously. It didn't matter if it was deionized water or 80 molar HF - you didn't screw around with the chemicals. Having to "wash up to the elbows" wasn't necessary because there weren't going to be chemicals around that you could get on you. Not to mention that you were in a fab suit in the first place.

      Damn, I'm glad I didn't work wherever you did. I value my health more than that.

  3. Newsflash! by Noryungi · · Score: 5, Funny

    Complex chemical compounds can be harmful to your health and to the environment! (Wow!)

    And, in related news, Bill Gates is incredibly rich and Saddam Hussein may not be such a nice guy after all! (Amazing!)

    More information in our next news program... Film at 11.

    --
    The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
  4. as if a geek's taken a breath of fresh air lately by colnago · · Score: 5, Funny
    a *real* geek doesn't get outside enough to care about the environment.


    Okay, it's not very funny. Don't laugh.

  5. Re:And what are we supposed to do? by phuturephunk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    . . Its just like any other period of mass adoption of technology in Human history . . I mean, look at the way England and the United states manufactured materials before the beginning of last century . . Smokestacks belching unfiltered by product into the skies and run-off pipes dumping raw sewage into the rivers and seas . . There's a honeymoon period where everybody's eating up the tech and the whole issue of 'cost' other than the bottom line for materials really isn't taken into account . . Only sometime after the initial binge do people finally standup with that hangover and see the potential damage that the consumption really causes . .Now Environmentalists will kvetch about it for a while and we'll go through the cycle of upgrading the process so its greener . . .Its the beauty of innovation :) . . And plus, its pure entertainment to watch both sides hurl statistics at each other with such vicious aplomb . . ;) . . .

  6. Re:A clean room by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 5, Funny

    But there won't be any environmentally safe process anytime in the near future.

    That's not hardly fair. We have a newly structured govt. in the US that is pushing hard for greener processes. They will cut taxes for big industry, relax emission standards etc...all so our children can have a greener environment to grow up in. Of course green is the color of more than grass.

  7. getting better! by lopati · · Score: 5, Informative

    at least from the intel press release :D

    The new manufacturing technology enabled by the 300-mm technology also provides significant benefits from an environmental perspective. The chips manufactured in Fab11X will require less water and generate fewer emissions per chip than other fabs. Water and chemical use will be more efficient. When compared to a 200-mm facility Fab 11X will produce 48 percent less volatile organic compound emissions, use 42 percent less ultra pure water and will use approximately 40 percent less energy.

  8. Re:and... by tjensor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes but it doesnt have to be those countries that stand up to them. The consuming countries can do it just as effectively. The US and/or Europe alone could do it by simply saying "Show us an audited trail of how you produced these chips. For every gram of crud you produce thats an extra 10% sales tax".

    The manufacturers need these markets. If the markets dont like the manufacturers methodds, they can force them to change.

    --
    <fnord>OBEY</fnord>
  9. Re:I make waste, too by gosand · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This article is just reason # 87 why I cancelled my SciAm subscription earlier this year after 15 years of subscribing. They've veered from true science and now feel the need 'preach' environment, evolution, abortion, etc. in the monthly Editor's Perspectives (and various articles).

    I have subscribed for about 6 years, and I noticed that there have been more environmental articles, but I don't consider them to be preachy. They give some good environmental data, and ususally don't go into too much politics about it. I know recently there was a story on how some impoverished countries get a lot of our scrap electronics, and how they salvage metals from them. They point out how toxic this is to the people and the water supplies there. I like finding out about this stuff, because nobody else is reporting on it. We use a LOT of microchips, as do other countries. We need to know that there are dangers in this. Granted, I haven't read this article yet (I am a couple of months behind on my issues) but I'll bet that they are simply pointing out the environmental hazards of chip production, and as chip use increases, the hazards increase. Why is this such a bad thing to know? The more chips we produce, hopefully the better our processes will become, and eventually we will come up with a replacement technology that will make silicon obsolete. Hopefully this new technology will be more friendly to the environment. I'm no Moby, calling the turkey hotline to save the widdle turkeys, but I think we do need to consider our environment.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  10. Cost benefit analysis by panurge · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Every time I send a 5Mb file by internet, that is packaging and carriage that has been avoided.

    Every time I use conferencing over the internet, I am saving (typically) about 30lb of Diesel (and it would have been nearer 45lb of gas in my last car)

    I'm not arguing that we should ignore the environmental costs of technology - places like the former Communist block and Texas are unpleasantly polluted as a result of doing just that - but that we should look closely at the costs and benefits. Given the potential of global warming and the eventual runout of oil, the more we use silicon to reduce the number of boring journeys we have to do, whether by mobile phone, networked computer, or whatever, the better it is going to be for us.

    And for those who don't already know - substances like sulfuric acid and HF are widely used in the petrochemical industry. And what happens to all the sulfur they have to remove to get low-sulfur fuel? It surely doesn't get fired into space by a rail gun.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  11. Something the article doesn't mention... by cowbutt · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ...is the net conservation of resources and energy by the use of semiconductors. For example, if by having a PC and internet connection at home, it becomes possible to work from home, I wouldn't be surprised if the breakeven point between that and driving to work was reached very quickly.

  12. Oh, I absolutely agree. by Gruneun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Our entire economy is based on the premise that the lowest bidder is always the best one.

    That explains why everyone here drives a Yugo, eats Big Top-brand cereal, and writes their posts from an eMachine.