Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T01:33:25.173Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Ultrapurity and Energy Use: Case Study of Semiconductor Manufacturing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2011

Eric Williams
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Nikhil Krishnan
Affiliation:
McKinsey & Company
Sarah Boyd
Affiliation:
University of California
Bhavik R. Bakshi
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
Timothy G. Gutowski
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dušan P. Sekulić
Affiliation:
University of Kentucky
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The notion that technological progress leads to reduced demand of materials and energy to manufacture products and deliver services is known as dematerialization [1]. The conventional conception of dematerialization views products and services as static, and from this perspective technological progress can but mitigate the impact per product produced. A demand for increased functionality and performance, however, induces changes in products. Automobiles, computers, and cell phones, for example, have become significantly more complex over the past two decades. A more complex design generally implies tighter tolerances in materials, parts, and manufacturing processes. Semiconductor, nanotechnology, and pharmaceutical manufacturing in particular require chemicals and processing environments that are much purer than traditional industries. Viewing this trend through the lens of thermodynamics, one can assert that the entropy of many products has been decreasing as a function of increasing sophistication. The second law of thermodynamics dictates that the entropy of an isolated system cannot decrease. A purified separation has lower entropy than a mixed one; thus purification implies interaction with the external world. In practice, this interaction is subjecting the system to processes that involve net inflows of energy, e.g., distillation. Purification in practice requires the input of energy, suggesting that increasing complexity should come at a cost of additional processing. This additional processing requires additional secondary energy and materials to attain the desired low-entropy form, a trend we call secondary materialization [2].

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cleveland, C. J. and Ruth, M., “Indicators of dematerialization and the materials intensity of use,” J. Ind. Ecol. 2, 15–50 (1999).CrossRef
Williams, E. D., Ayres, R. U., and Heller, M., “The 1.7 kilogram microchip: Energy and material use in the production of semiconductor devices,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 36, 5504–5510 (2002).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, G. E., “Cramming more components onto integrated circuits,” Electronics 38, 114–117 (1965).Google Scholar
,LBNL, “Energy efficiency in semiconductor cleanrooms: A technical perspective” (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, CA, 2002), available at http://ateam.lbl.gov/cleanroom/technical.html.
,ORNL, Materials for Separation Technologies: Energy and Emission Reduction Opportunities (Oak Ridge National Laboratories, Oak Ridge, TN, 2005).Google Scholar
Oppenheimer, O. and Sorenson, E., “Comparative energy consumption in batch and continuous distillation,” Comput. Chem. Eng. 21, S529–S534 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zant, P., Microchip Processing, 5th ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 2004).Google Scholar
Howe-Grant, M. and Kroschwitz, J., in Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology(Wiley, New York, 1997), Vol. 22, pp. 1–154.Google Scholar
Jackson, K. A., Materials Science and Technology, Vol. 16 of Processing of Semiconductors Series (VCH Press, Weinheim, Germany, 1996).Google Scholar
Peters, L., “Ultrapure water: Rewards of recycling,” Semiconduct. Intl. 21, 71–76 (1998).Google Scholar
Genova, J. and Shadman, F., Environ. Prog. 16, XX–XX (1994).
Ultrapure Water Monitoring Guidelines, Rev. 2.0, Air Liquide, 2009. Available at http://www.balazs.com/jmen/PDFDocs/Guidelines/UPW_Guidelines_rev2.0.pdf.
Krishnan, N., Boyd, S., Somani, A., Raoux, S., Clark, D., and Dornfeld, D., “A hybrid life cycle inventory for semiconductor manufacturing,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 42, 3069–3075 (2008).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scholz, W. H., “Processes for industrial production of hydrogen and associated environmental effects,” Gas Sep. Purif. 7, 131–139 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhatia, B., A Basic Design Guide for Cleanroom applications, 2007. Available at http://www.pdhonline.org/courses/m143/m143.htm.
, L. Reichl, A Modern Course in Statistical Physics (University of Texas Press, Austin, 1984).
Sciamanna, S. F. and Prausnitz, J. M., “Thermodynamics of highly dilute solutions and the quest for ultrapurity,” AIChE J. 33, 1315–1321 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reis, J. C. R., “Phase equilibria and thermodynamic conditions for the obtention of pure materials,” J. Phys. Chem. 90, 6078–6080 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kubic, L., “Fluctuations in highly dilute solutions,” AIChE J. 34, 1581–1583 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, A. H., “On the irrelevance of phase size in purification,” Comments J. Phys. Chem. 92, 6477–6478 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumann, H. and Tillman, A. M., The Hitch Hikers Guide to LCA (Studentlitteratur AB, Lund, Sweden, 2004).Google Scholar
Leontief, W., “Environmental repercussions and the economic structure: An input–output approach,” Rev. Econ. Statist. 52, 262–271 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullard, C. and Herendeen, R., “The energy cost of goods and services,” Energy Policy3(4), 268–278 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendrickson, C. T., Horvath, A., Joshi, S., and Lave, L. B., “Economic input–output models for environmental life-cycle assessment,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 32, 184A (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,Economic Input-Output Life Cycle Assessment (EIO-LCA), Carnegie Mellon University, Available at: http://www.eiolca.net.
Engelenburg, B. C. W., Rossum, T. F. M., Blok, K., and Vringer, K., “Calculating the energy requirements of household purchases,” Energy Policy 22, 648–656 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suh, S., Lenzen, M., Treloar, G. J., Hondo, H., Horvath, A., Huppes, G., Jolliet, O., Klann, U., Krewitt, W., Moriguchi, Y., Munksgaard, J., and Norris, G., “System boundary selection in life-cycle inventories using hybrid approaches,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 38, 657–664 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, E., “Energy intensity of computer manufacturing: Hybrid analysis combining process and economic input–output methods,”Environ. Sci. Technol. 38, 6166–6174 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, E., Weber, C., and Hawkins, T., “Hybrid approach to managing uncertainty in life cycle inventories,”J. Ind. Ecol. 15, 928–944 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullard, C., Pennter, P., and Pilati, D., “Net energy analysis: Handbook for combining process and input–output analysis,” Resources Energy 1, 267–313 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, T., Hendrickson, C., Higgins, C., Matthews, H. S., and Suh, S., “A mixed-unit input-output model for environmental life-cycle assessment and material flow analysis,” Environ. Sci, & Tech. 41, 1024–1031 (2007).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baily, P., Farmer, D., Jessop, D., and Jones, D., Purchasing, Principles and Management, 9th ed. (Financial Times Press, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2005).Google Scholar
,SEMI, Guide To Calculate Cost Of Ownership (COO) Metrics For Semiconductor Manufacturing Equipment, SEMI Standard E35–0307 (Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International, San Jose, CA, 2007).Google Scholar
Lancaster, M. C., Ultrapure Water – The Real Cost (Rose Associates, Los Altos, CA, 1996).Google Scholar
Xu, T. Tengfang and Tschudi, W., “Energy Performance of Cleanroom Environmental Systems,” LBNL Doc. 793761 (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2001).
Xu, T., “Characterization of minienvironments in a cleanroom: Assessing energy performance and its implications,” Building Environ. 42, 2993–3000 (2007).
, L. Deng and E. Williams, “Functionality versus ‘Typical Product’ measures of energy efficiency: Case study of semiconductor manufacturing,” in press, J. Ind. Ecology, DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2010.00306.x (2011).CrossRef
Boyd, S., Horvath, A., and Dornfeld, D., “Life-cycle energy demand and global warming potential of computational logic,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 7303–7309 (2009).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×