Document zd03a5Q4nKzGwqx76jG5k0eEa

Ref. Ares(2024)5588380 - 01/08/2024 PFAS Workshop 26th October 2023 SEMI - A Global Scope for a Global Industry! >2,500 members worldwide Thought Leadership Worldwide Offices 1,000+ Standards 2,300+ Program Hours Expositions/ Conferences 170+ Tech Programs EHS/ESG 20+ Tech Communities Market Intelligence Reports Strategic Tech Communities: ESDA, FOA, FlexTech, MSIG, SOIC Tech partners: imec, Fraunhofer, CEA-Leti, IEEE, ITRI, AIST Smart Initiatives 2023 Top Priorities Talent Development, DEI & e-learning Sustainability Global Advocacy SEMI PFAS WG 245 members Think Tanks Supply Chain Management 2 Introduction to ESIA Represent the interests of the Europeanbased semiconductor industry and advocate for its international competitiveness Most R&D-intensive sector Highly competitive global market Highly-developed global supply chain Enabler for a multitude of other industries EU 8% of global production capacity Direct employment 200.000 indirect up to 1.000.000 ESIA is member of the World Semiconductor Council (WSC) Agenda 1. Opening remarks by ESIA and SEMI 2. Presentation of key evidence and main findings on the use of PFAS in the semiconductor industry 3. Roundtable discussion among European Commission and industry representatives a. PFAS in the semiconductor industry i. Need for PFAS and their unique characteristics in the semiconductor industry ii. Definition of the "semiconductor manufacturing process" derogation iii. Criticality of the semiconductor industry as enabler for key initiatives (Green Deal, NZIA, Chips Act etc.) b. Input to research projects i. Complexity of semiconductor industry's R&D needs. ii. TTC agreement on incentives for research into PFAS alternatives for the semiconductor industry. c. International collaboration agreements i. Diminished competitiveness/level playing field with other jurisdictions ii. PFAS manufacturers and supply chain issues 4. Closing remarks by SEMI and ESIA 4 PFAS In The Semiconductor Industry 5 PFAS use by the Semiconductor industry Photolithography Plasma-Etching Di electric Ma terial Si l icon Removal of Photoresist PFAS in Semiconductor Manufacturing related equipment (Heat Transfer Fluids, Fluoropolymer in equipment) PFAS as Process Chemicals (photoresists, plasma etching gases, chamber cleaning) Robert Bosch GmbH Robert Bosch GmbH PFAS in articles (semiconductor products, adhesives, cables, printed circuit boards) PFAS in Facilities (cooling/heating systems, Polymers in infrastructure: filters, tubing, linings, o-rings) 6 Robert Bosch GmbH Application examples in Semiconductors Reasons for the use of PFAS in Semiconductor Industry: Chemically restistant to agressive media (acidic, caustic, oxidative) High thermal stability (>260C) Low friction, very little abrasion (very little particle-emission) Source for highly reactive flourine species in plasma, which reacts with Silicon, forming gaseous molecules such as SiF4 Source of strong acids via optical amplification (Photoacid Generators) Low refractive index, good UV-Transmission Very low Surface energy Hydrophobic and oleophobic propeties enabling multi-barrier role Good mechanical stability Favourable electric properties (good isolation, low dielectric) Due to the numerous special properties of PFAS there are no known equivalent PFAS-free alternatives in most applications. Atom-bonding C-F (in CF2-R1-R2) C-O (single Bond) C-N (single Bond) C-C (in Ethane) Binding energy 503 kJ/mol 358 kJ/mol 305 kJ/mol 376 kJ/mol 7 Reasons for a comprehensive derogation Annex XV dossier does not fully capture latest state of knowledge on PFAS uses in the semiconductor industry (Table A.49 is not complete) R&D efforts are ongoing across the industry Most applications have no known alternatives today. There is no guarantee that all applications can be substituted. Development cycles in the semiconductor industry are significantly longer than the proposed derogation (between and 10 and +25 years) PFAS restrictions will affect the entire value chain: material, manufacturing equipment, manufacturing, servicing and imports. 8 Semiconductors crucial for EU policy objectives Not securing a comprehensive derogation will effectively stop the value chain. Several EU policy priorities would be affected: The EU industrial strategy Supporting the EU's global competitiveness Making the EU climate neutral by 2050 Shaping Europe's digital future Chips Act: EU goal to reach 20% of global production from currently 9%. Net Zero Industry Act the deployment of clean energy and its associated technologies Achieving European climate neutrality by 2050, will be harder, if not impossible to achieve 55% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 could be in jeopardy Example: Semiconductors and the green transition: Green energy generators have high-power semiconductor content : Wind: ~3,000 /MW Solar: ~4,000 /MW Accelerated conversion from fossil to electrical in mobility Roughly 80% of car sales in 2030 will be EV (up from ~15% in 2021) Semiconductor content in cars more than doubles from traditional to EV BEV: ~$1,000 per vehicle (2021, Source: Gartner; Strategy Analytics; BCG semiconductor supply-demand forecast) 9 Way Forward Without an appropriate derogation covering the entire semiconductor supply and value chains, the semiconductor industry in Europe will be in jeopardy. The derogation should provide a clear path for renewal to account for technology development times and possible impossibility of substitution. Need for support to enable semiconductor industry R&D to replace PFAS wherever possible. 10 Input To Research Projects 11 PFAS alternative commercial implementation time Fundamental Substance R&D The time required to develop a PFAS alternate targeted to certain technical use cases. PTFEALT1 The semiconductor industry companies will hav e a much better understanding of timelines and impacts to semi-industry technology such as process chemicals, process-touching components, process chambers, etc.. The impact to commodity technologies, such as capacitors, batteries, and general electronics, will not be well understood 12 directly in the semiconductor eco-system. Benefit analysis of a PFAS alternative The benefit of switching to a PFAS alternative should be balanced against impacts from the production, transportation, and use of the alternate & related basic products, such as: 13 EU PFAS research pipeline - what we know The Semiconductor Industry and its ecosystem will need collaborative research to ensure progress in finding/developing alternatives to PFAS, advancing capture technologies and developing analytical techniques. It is imperative that the EU research mechanisms cater for PFAS. It's looking very likely that Horizon Europe will be the primary mechanism for semiconductor research on PFAS. 14 Horizon Europe funding & TTC incentives The Semiconductor industry is currently working to develop a PFAS research roadmap to prioritise specific research projects. In parallel, the industry is engaged with working groups and alliances to ensure PFAS is explicitly named in pending and future research calls - both the "regular" Horizon Europe programme and the element under the Chips Act via the Chips Joint Undertaking. Based upon the analysis undertaken by the industry, such research will need to be of a multiyear and possibly multidecade for certain PFAS uses. In the 4th TTC Ministerial meeting in May'23, it was noted in the minutes that PFAS research and the industry was discussed. Are there any specifics to this that can be shared? "Going forward, we are exploring additional ways to collaborate, including how to cooperate on incentives for research on alternatives to the use of per- and polyfluorinated substances (PFAS) in semiconductor manufacturing." 15 International Collaboration Aspects 16 The Potential Impact on the Industry Calls for Global Cooperation PFAS is also on the radar of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and regulatory initiatives are ongoing. The US semiconductor industry has a large share of the manufacturing market and hosts leading chipmakers and equipment manufacturers. The EPA evaluation framework seems to have: a differentiated approach, depending on potential for exposure and environmental release a focus on PFAS that are likely Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxic (PBT) a strong distinction between dispersive/non-dispersive uses reporting rules with narrower PFAS definition (C1 PFAS seem largely excluded) At State level: Minnesota, Maine and New Jersey are working on rulemaking and reporting While other jurisdictions (USA, Canada, UK) are looking into possible PFAS regulation, there are currently no initiatives equivalent to the EU PFAS restriction proposal which poses a big risk of a further competitiveness loss for the EU. Considering potential restrictions at a global scale is critical to ensure a level playing field in terms of timing and scope (clarity on PFAS definition, sector (consumer vs. industrial), derogations and applications). 17