Texas Instruments announces two new chip plants in the U.S.
Texas Instruments on Wednesday announced plans for two new chip factories, widening its ongoing U.S. chip manufacturing expansion.
Why it matters: The U.S. has been scrambling to ramp up chip production capacity after the pandemic exposed the country's over-reliance on imports as a national security issue.
Driving the news: TI plans to add two new semiconductor fabrication plants — or fabs — at its "megasite" in Sherman, Texas, "to support future demand."
It was not immediately clear whether the U.S. government would provide additional incentives for the projects after the Biden administration awarded up to $1.6 billion in Chips Act funding to the company in December.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick recently told Axios' Mike Allen that the Trump administration wants to squeeze more investments out of companies that received those incentives.
Lutnick issued a statement Wednesday hailing the announcement: "Our partnership with TI will support U.S. chip manufacturing for decades to come."
Context: TI has been expanding chip manufacturing in the U.S. for several years.
The company's first new fab in Sherman will begin production in 2025 after three years of construction. A second fab already underway there recently completed its exterior. The two new fabs announced Wednesday will follow those.
Separately, TI is ramping up production at a second fab in Richardson, Texas. And it's moving along with a wafer lab in Lehi, Utah, while also continuing construction on a second fab there.
What they're saying: Apple, Ford, SpaceX, Medtronic and Nvidia executives said in a statement that they're each partnering with TI in their respective capacities.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
13 hours ago
- Politico
Decoding the megabill's threat to clean energy
Presented by The fate of hundreds of clean energy projects hangs in the balance as House and Senate lawmakers negotiate just how far they are willing to go to bulldoze Biden-era tax credits ahead of a self-imposed July 4 deadline. In a new POLITICO analysis, Kelsey Tamborrino and Jessie Blaeser identified 794 imperiled wind farms, solar plants, battery storage facilities and other planned clean electricity generation projects located in overwhelmingly Republican districts. The projects, which have not yet begun construction, could be at risk of losing two critical tax breaks if House lawmakers prevail in rolling back Democrats' 2022 climate law. While the Senate's competing version of President Donald Trump's megabill would soften the tax credit assault, hundreds of those projects may still be affected if they don't move fast enough to start construction — a tricky if not infeasible task. How the battle unfurls could have major implications for the nation's ability to tackle its share of climate pollution and meet an anticipated spike in power demand as more data centers and manufacturing facilities come online. Clean energy makes up the majority of new power capacity expected to be added to the nation's electric grid during the next five years, according to a POLITICO analysis of data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. 'Now is not the time to be taking new generation off the grid, and especially new cheap generation off the grid,' Tom Taylor with research firm Atlas Public Policy said about clean energy. The details are crucialThe House bill aims to fulfill Trump's promise of rolling back what he calls former President Joe Biden's 'Green New Scam' by aggressively sunsetting the clean energy credits. It would require projects to begin construction within 60 days of the bill's passage and start operating by 2028 to qualify — a tall order that could be easily thwarted by factors outside a project sponsor's control, such as permitting or interconnection delays. The House bill offers an exception for nuclear facilities. But EIA's data shows only one project that could potentially be done in time to benefit — rendering the exemption largely inconsequential. The Senate version would keep the credits intact for certain power sources, such as nuclear, geothermal, hydropower and energy storage. For wind and solar, however, it would require projects to begin construction by the end of 2025 to receive the full credit and before 2028 for a partial credit. The slightly more relaxed approach to cutting clean energy credits could spare a minimum of 57 projects, POLITICO found, while still raising questions about the future of as many as 569 wind and solar initiatives. Clean power advocates are warning about the consequences of both versions of the bill, including some Republican lawmakers and GOP-led lobbying groups. But House conservative hard-liners are threatening to tank the bill entirely unless the Senate version more closely mirrors the House draft. (Other sections of the Senate bill are facing additional obstacles from the chamber's parliamentarian, but more on that below). All in all, the megabill battle could make for a dramatic July 4 weekend on Capitol Hill if it doesn't prove too heavy of a lift for Congress to meet Republican leaders' aggressive deadline. Thank goodness it's Friday — thank you for tuning in to POLITICO's Power Switch. I'm your host, Arianna Skibell. Power Switch is brought to you by the journalists behind E&E News and POLITICO Energy. Send your tips, comments, questions to askibell@ Today in POLITICO Energy's podcast: Alex Guillén breaks down how the Trump administration lost a court battle this week after it tried to roll back hundreds of millions of dollars in Biden-era climate funding. Power Centers Senate parliamentarian: Not so fast, y'all Major energy and climate components of Republicans' party-line bill could fall out in the coming days after the Senate parliamentarian ruled those provisions would run afoul of budget reconciliation rules, writes Andres Picon. The parliamentarian has advised that eight sections would not meet the strict budget-related requirements, including ones that would target Democrats' 2022 climate bill, repeal vehicle emissions rules and amend the National Environmental Policy Act to streamline certain permitting processes. The parliamentarian has yet to review the much-debated Senate Finance portion of the bill that seeks to unravel the Biden-era clean energy tax credits. Trump admin eyes Mojave Desert groundwaterThe Trump administration is contemplating endorsing a contentious proposal to pump ancient groundwater from beneath the Mojave Desert and sell it to parched customers in Arizona, write Annie Snider and Camille von Kaenel. The proposal from the Los Angeles-based water company Cadiz Inc. comes as the Colorado River water supply situation becomes increasingly dire. The waterway's flows have shrunk 20 percent since the turn of the century and climate scientists say it's not unreasonable to think that another 20 percent could be lost in the coming decades. Suits on suits: California AG is sued by his office California Attorney General Rob Bonta's decision to hire an outside law firm to handle a high-profile climate lawsuit has drawn its own legal challenge — from lawyers in his office, writes Lesley Clark. The labor union that represents attorneys in Bonta's office has filed a lawsuit, arguing the Democratic AG should not have enlisted an outside law firm in the state's lawsuit against some of the world's largest oil companies. In Other News Summer's first heatwave: A heat dome is about to bring extreme heat and humidity to more than 200 million people. Scientists warn: The world has three years left to limit warming below a critical threshold. Subscriber Zone A showcase of some of our best subscriber content. Trump's actions to purge the federal workforce and budget threaten to undermine one of his goals: getting wildfires in the United States under control. The Supreme Court opened the door Friday for fuel producers to challenge California vehicle emissions standards in a decision that sparked a stinging rebuke from one of the court's liberal justices. The Trump administration is arguing that Congress' watchdog overstepped when it advised lawmakers they could not nullify California's clean vehicle waivers via the Congressional Review Act. That's it for today, folks. Thanks for reading, and have a great weekend!
Axios
14 hours ago
- Axios
Exclusive: Google wants to help cities build AI strategies
Google is releasing a playbook on Friday to help mayors across the country adopt city-wide AI strategies, per an announcement shared exclusively with Axios. Why it matters: Cities are approaching the technology wildly differently and with varying levels of resources, interest and need. But the "AI divide" — like the "digital divide" that came before it with internet access — is projected to deepen tech access disparities. "Building Your City's AI Strategy," released in partnership with the United States Conference of Mayors, is meant to serve as a framework for mayors and other municipal leaders to assess and implement AI. What's inside: The guide has chapters on identifying staff to participate in an "AI workshop," conducting surveys on AI usage and needs, and drafting an AI strategy document. The survey asks questions like how staff are currently using AI tools and which areas of city services could use AI the most. The guide states that AI offers cities "significant advantages" and "can automate certain tasks while freeing up city staff for complex, human-centric work." What they're saying: "Whatever problem you've been dealing with that you've inherited from your predecessors, that you can't figure out the way to fix, AI is the once in a generation tool that gives you a shot at fixing it," Cris Turner, vice president of government affairs at Google, told Axios. By the numbers: 96% of 100 mayors across the globe surveyed by Bloomberg Philanthropies in 2023 said they were interested in using generative AI, but only 2% surveyed were actively implementing it and 69% said they were exploring it. The bottom line: Companies like Google depend on people using their generative AI products for profit. But more users help the models get better, Turner noted.
Los Angeles Times
14 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Supreme Court joins Trump and GOP in targeting California's emission standards
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday joined President Trump and congressional Republicans in siding with the oil and gas industry in its challenge to California's drive for electric vehicles. In a 7-2 decision, the justices revived the industry's lawsuit and ruled that fuel makers had standing to sue over California's strict emissions standards. The suit argued that California and the Environmental Protection Agency under President Biden were abusing their power by relying on the 1970s-era rule for fighting smog as a means of combating climate change in the 21st Century. California's new emissions standard 'did not target a local California air-quality problem — as they say is required by the Clean Air Act — but instead were designed to address global climate change,' Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote using italics to described the industry's position. The court did not rule on the suit itself but he said the fuel makers had standing to sue because they would be injured by the state's rule. 'The fuel producers make money by selling fuel. Therefore, the decrease in purchases of gasoline and other liquid fuels resulting from the California regulations hurts their bottom line,' Kavanaugh said. Only Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson disagreed. Jackson questioned why the court would 'revive a fuel-industry lawsuit that all agree will soon be moot (and is largely moot already). ...This case gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this Court than ordinary citizens.' But the outcome was overshadowed by the recent actions of President Trump and congressional Republicans. With Trump's backing, the House and Senate adopted measures disapproving regulations adopted by the Biden administration that would have allowed California to enforce broad new regulations to require 'zero emissions' cars and trucks. Trump said the new rules were designed to displace California as the nation's leader in fighting air pollution and greenhouse gases. In a bill signing ceremony at the White House, he said the disapproval measures 'will prevent California's attempt to impose a nationwide electric vehicle mandate and to regulate national fuel economy by regulating carbon emissions.' 'Our Constitution does not allow one state special status to create standards that limit consumer choice and impose an electric vehicle mandate upon the entire nation,' he said. In response, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said 'the fight for fight for clean air is far from over. While we are disappointed by the Supreme Court's decision to allow this case to go forward in the lower court, we will continue to vigorously defend California's authority under the Clean Air Act.' Some environmentalists said the decision greenlights future lawsuits from industry and polluters. 'This is a dangerous precedent from a court hellbent on protecting corporate interests,' said David Pettit, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity's Climate Law Institute. 'This decision opens the door to more oil industry lawsuits attacking states' ability to protect their residents and wildlife from climate change.' Times staff writer Tony Briscoe, in Los Angeles, contributed to this report.
