Pritzker Forum on Global Cities: The Semiconductor Race

I want to introduce our distinguished panel. First, we have Rashid Basher, dean of the School of Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana champagne. We have Jenna Le Keith singer, senior director of G of government Affairs at the special competitive studies project. She is previously worked with the US Commerce department and the National Institute of Standards and measures we all love as nist. And virtually we have Congressman M Raja uh Krishna Mori, the ranking member of the select committee on the strategic competition between the US and the China Chinese Communist party. Thank you for joining us. All the panelists. We're excited. So here's the first question, most important question: how in the world did we get here? How did we get here? So, Congressman, can you start us Show more

off? Well, thank you for that question. I really appreciate uh being on this panel with these distinguished guests, uh and yourself, and I think that the way I would say we got here is uh to maybe describe how we started, which was we had a dominant position in the uh semiconductor space at one point where we were producing almost 40% of the world's semiconductors. The semiconductor was uh pioneered and invented in the United States and indeed I think uh, the transistor was invented at the University of Illinois, Urbana champagne, Dean Maser, if I'm not mistaken. Yes, I'll talk about that. Not only. Not not only does Illinois, has Illinois played a large role in the uh uh kind of transformation of micro Electronics, but helped invent some of the key components, part of the microelectronic supply chain, and uh over time, what has happened is a lot of that manufacturing has happened abroad, uh specifically in places like Taiwan, um as we have specialized more in the design and uh other aspects of the manufacturing uh of of semiconductors. But what we F found very quickly during the pandemic is that, because of our um incredible Reliance on other countries for the manufacturing of these semiconductors, there were uh dramatic shortages of semiconductors and everything from automobiles to dishwashers uh that were being produced during the pandemic. And so in Congress we decided, you know, we should really, from a national security standpoint and for other reasons, we should start to uh onshore the production of these semiconductors. And so that's what led to the Advent of the chips act, which has really changed the game and, as you mentioned, incentivized the manufacturing and Fabrication of these semi-conductor chips um in the United States. Yes, very good point, and I would love to hear um rashed talk about. You have the contribution of the University we already heard a little bit about. Yeah, maybe I can add to that. So thank you for Show more

having this panel. Um yeah, so actually this is uh. This year is the 75th anniversary of the invention of the transistor. Uh, the invention of the transistor was uh by uh John bardine uh and two other individuals, and uh, that was done at Bell Labs, actually. So, but we certainly claim credit to that because John bardine then came to University of Illinois and was a professor Professor there for over 30 years and he won two Nobel prizes. There's only two people in history that have won two Nobel prizes. He won the first one for his work on the transistor that he did at Bell Labs uh, Show more

and then the second one on superc conductivity, much years, you know, many years later. So when you do it twice, I mean this is something very special. The first time wasn't a chance. So anyway, but long story is that, yeah, the fact is, as the congressman said, um, the key Innovations in the semiconductors and micro Electronics really came from the United States, right, um, and actually John bardine's first student, NE honc, invented the visible LED. He's known as the father of the LED. So, uh, he was a student and a professor at ufi for over 50 years. And then one more invention, uh that uh was Show more

really critical to sort of advancing microelectronics is the invention of the integrated circuit. So the idea that how do you take these transistors that before were sort of bulky, when they were even invented in 47 and onwards 48, 40 um, um, how do you put them on a chip? How do you integrate and make circuits? So the idea of integrate circuits was Jack Kilby. He was also going be proud. He went for his undergraduate at ufi uh and then went on to Texas Instruments. So and he won a Nobel Prize as well for for the invention of the integrated circuit. So we have this: foundational technologies that were all came out of, came out of the United States and from Illinois, you could um, but then over the years, what's happened is that the manufa facturing has really gone offshore, and companies like tsmc that you mentioned, uh, we actually as a university have partnership with them. I visited tsmc in Taiwan multiple times and, uh, certainly, the very, very meticulous, uh, uh details of that Show more

manufacturing process Technologies and the hard work that goes behind it, and all of that, they, yeah, took it on early on and spent almost three decades really perfecting it. So today, uh, they, they, they, they manufactured almost 65% of the world's chips in Taiwan, and this is one of the very interesting conversations we can have around the geopolitics of it as well. Exactly, jenie, would you like to add anything? Sure, I would like to add that a key piece to all of this is that with the erosion of the manufacturing sector, has come the erosion of having workers with the abilities to build these chips Show more

domestically. So that's why the chips and science act that was referenced by Congressman Krishna Worthy is so incredible. Important because not only does it invest in the manufacturing but it also invests in our ability to train the next generation of workers to build these chips, and we've had that conversation over and over again about just how critical all these things have to come together for us to actually enjoy the success. So we've talked a little bit about challenges. Um, let's talk about the geop geopolitical stakes at the moment. What are the global concept consquences of the US- China semiconductor competition? And I'm going to open this up to to anybody. I'm going to ask you to start, um, Congressman, but I'd like to hear from everybody. Well, I think that, um, you're you're absolutely right that semiconductors have found their way into this strategic competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party. Um, for various reasons, but one of the reasons is that the highest end semiconductors often are powering the highest end Technologies, whether they are in civilian or military uses, and so, whether it's artificial intelligence or Quantum Computing or um other uh high-end manufacturing, uh that could be for a dual use uh capacity, uh, the CCP is trying to race ahead to have the latest technology on hand to help modernize the people's Liberation Army, known as as the PLA, and to uh, in the process, uh kind of fuel their military buildup. And so what has happened is that in this country, uh, the Biden Administration has put in place various controls to make sure that Show more

the very highest end semiconductors that we have, as well as the equipment that would be necessary to manufacture those highest s semiconductors, don't fall into the hands of those who might be us using it to either modernize the ccp's Show more

military or use it to perpetrate Human Rights abuses, because what is happening is that some of these high-end semiconductors are fueling the artificial intelligence and facial recognition software that's being used to, for instance, um repress or perpetrate the genocide against the Wagers in the Northwest province of shinhan, and so this is, like uh at the heart of our concerns about protecting our technology, while at the same time, making sure that we maintain uh Innovation leadership in the United States as well. Yeah, it's a tenuous balance, so I'd love to hear, uh J, what do you think about? Sure, I think. I think what's really important to articulate here is that, while we have seen an erosion of our manufacturing sector domestically, the PRC was uh Show more

seeking a policy of indigenous innovation in a bunch of critical technology areas, including semiconductors, and why this matters? Because those semiconductors that compute power. It underpins the Technologies of today and the future. The country that holds the ability to design, to manufacture, to build those Technologies is the nation that can control the global Marketplace and reap the benefits of those Technologies most greatly, and so what we need to really be cognizant of here domestically is how semiconductors can impact both our prosperity and our security. So, from the economic end, we want it here so we can have the compute power to power Technologies of the future, but we want to be able to, just as the congressman said, be able to control our ability to um really develop the technologies that Show more

are used for National Security purpose. Well, that actually, um, you know, I'm going to want you to talk a little more about that, uh, with with the con, this concern around qualified Personnel in a moment. But rashed, how do you? Yeah, if I can add to that. So, just taking a step back this for everyone to know. So the chips Act was the chips and science act with the chips part was really was, was funded. So it's about 53 billion, out of which 39 billion is for um uh, bringing manufacturing back to the US or expanding manufacturing, and also for the supply chain for semiconductors, uh, and then 11 in know billion, plus a little bit more is for Show more

advanced R&D, uh, through what's we're going to be called, What's called the national semiconductor technology Center, nstc. So I think the chips Act is great. This was really very much needed and the goal for it, I mean there's I I haven't seen a more very formal quantitative goal per se, but even with conversations and panels that we've had with, let's say, the CEO of Intel or IBM, they say if we can bring 50% of the manufacturing back to the US in a decade, that would be great. That's as a, as an approximate goal. Let's say something to that effect. So want to bring you know more of of the manufacturing back. Um, the chips Act is, like I said, great, but the- and you heard earlier- you know one. One semiconductor fabrication facility costs about 20 billion, between 10 to 20 depending on the size. The one that Intel is putting up in Ohio is going to be in that range, about 15 billion or so, something like that. So the fact is, even with what is there, you can talk about couple of Fabs, let's say right, uh, but I think it's a very, very important step forward and I know there's probably already discussions of a chips too, perhaps, um, so the question is that, you know, how do we do that? How do we help these companies come back or grow capacity here in the US, uh, and then how Show more

do we also stay ahead? So how do we Leap Frog? So one of the things we have been also saying is that we have to make sure that we really continue the investment in Innovation, R&D, uh, but also this, this sort of the gap between research and the commercialization. So this where the nstc comes in, and making sure that things like Quantum, you know things of this advanced technology that might not always be seen as what we do today- we got to keep that connection and continue to Leap Frog and Innovation as we try to bring the manufacturing, more of the manufacturing, back in the US. Right, and of course, the challenge is the the short amount of time that has been defined by the ACT. We really got to get some good work done. Right. It in order, it's a very ambitious goal, but it's very exciting. Yeah, it is, it is. So. I love talking about people and we talked about the challenge around having qualified Personnel to staff the Fabs and it's top of mine lately with the delays from tsmc's project in Arizona. So Show more

what have the choke points? What have been the choke points that have led to this deficit? And generally? I'll start with you. Sure I you know one of the major choke points is that we don't have enough qualified personnel, and that's why the chips and science really takes an approach to help train the next generation of workers, both directly in chips and Associated Fields. So one key area is looking toward apprenticeships and allowing companies to bring in future workers, train them and then have them right there on the Show more

job to get to work. You know, one thing that cities and states really can do to enhance this is to provide incentives and reimbursement- tax incentives and tuition reimbursement- to students and the organizations providing these apprenticeships. Right now, 29 states do that. We need to build that up, we need to make that greater and so that there's more access to apprenticeship programs. Another area that's really important is understanding that we just don't have a large enough domestic Workforce. We need to bring in workers overseas. That's why we really need to modernize our H1B Visa program programs and bring in workers uh, who have the ability to hone in on the needed Fields. Um, we need to start stapling green cards Show more

to PhD graduates who are focused on fields that will help Propel our nation in the future. So a combination of working domestically and bringing in workers for overseas really is the winning combination. And, Rasheed, what is what? Do you see the connection at the University level here around making sure that we are getting more students interested in this pathway? Absolutely know, so I think what you said it's so important and, uh, that's in terms of training, that's what we do for a living at University. So, um, absolutely, I think we're actually seeing this at different levels. Um, there is clearly- you know already- Investments that are coming from the federal government and from the from the chip sacks. So, for example, we were just recipients of a DOD microelectronics Commons Hub that was in collaboration with Indiana University of Illinois. So was it was Purdue univers of Illinois and University of Michigan. Three universities came together, these three states, and we won. One of the first branches of that funding was this hubs Show more

and as part of that Hub, there is a Workforce Development component. So I think some of that funding is starting to come now. Um, in our college, for example, in the Granger College of Engineering, we have a semiconductor minor that we started because, also for the workforce, uh, this Workforce that's needed for these Fabs of today and tomorrow is different than what was for the Fabs of yesterday. I actually worked in a Fab at National semiconductor and California and we moved. This is like 20 years ago. We moved Wafers, boxes, around ourselves. Now these Wafers are 12 Ines and larger and they're too heavy. There's robotics, so you need to have internet of things, robotics, autonomy, AI, uh manufacturing. All of these things are part of that. Training of semiconductors, so we need to have semiconductors- uh, I mean engineering graduates from across the different disciplines, right, not just material scientists or semic conductor Engineers per se, but rather across the board. So we're actually doing that. One of the things I can also mention is that a second level of, or second type of, partnership that's already, um, you know, uh, we're uh, we're seeing- is industry is coming directly as well to us for Workforce training. So we just actually um, very happy to announce a partnership- we just announced it a couple weeks ago- with Samsung. So Samsung is Japanese company, but they have a big facility in Austin. Uh, one of their largest facilities for Semiconductor manufacturing is in Austin and they came to us and we were the first school of in, uh, I mean outside of Texas. They get a lot of support from the state of Texas, but, uh, we were the first school outside of Texas where they actually uh funded a million dollar a year for fiveyear um internship program where I mean this program where students get scholarship and in return they have to go work for Samsung in Austin or wherever else in the US. At time there would be facilities, but in the US. So it's like the RC model, where pay for your tuition but then you have to go back and work for a certain number of years. So we're already seeing that happen as well. Um, in the region. Actually we are pretty well aligned. I do think it's a very unique moment in time where our institutions across the state of Illinois, with you, Chicago, Northwestern Chicago State, IIT, um, UI, even the National Labs, arone and firery- so we have all already come together, um, also supported by uh, this group that the governor had charged called innovate Illinois, um, uh, and we're actually talking about collaborating across our institutions. Actually, Chicago State recently won a, won a grant uh from NSF on Workforce Development, uh in semiconductors. So I think we're starting to see that at all levels uh, I mean we Show more

bring the largest we graduate from our College, the largest number of electrical engineers, computer scientists in the country as a college, that that number computer Engineers, computer scientists and uh electrical engineers. So I think in terms of bringing Talent here, uh, there is lot of upset, there's a lot of optimism and I agree we need to stay at the place where the world's best can want to come to the US. Right, that has to stay as a goal, absolutely, an aspiration, absolutely, absolutely. Well, I do want to do just a time check here, because next is our break and we're going to lose the congressman right at one o'clock. So any questions that you have, please get those prepared. I'm going to just have just a couple more questions here, because we have to talk about environmental and health impacts. You know from semiconductor Manufacturing. And also, Congressman, I would love to have you um help those who are working to develop uh Workforce in cities. What type of um uh help could you give them? What type of recommendations could you share with them about both of those things? So my myself and a guy named GT Thompson were Show more

the ones who authored the modernization of our nation's Career Technical education system. It used to be called the vocational education system, and this is really for uh people who don't get a four-year college degree or or more than that, and it turns out that even today, only one-third of Americans have a four-year college degree and two-thirds do not, and so for those two-thirds of Americans for whom we want them to have a ladder into the middle class uh, one excellent place where they will be able to find jobs is semiconductor manufacturing and U and so we've been Show more

trying to uh fund uh Pro programs to uh equip these Stars. These are um students uh who are trained through alternative routes, Stars uh to basically shine in the area of semiconductor manufacturing and that is an excellent place uh, where our city colleges, our community colleges, our high school districts especially in place, like Chicago, where you have a very close collaboration happening between employers uh, educational institutions and, of course, students uh can come together and take advantage of what we're trying to do at the federal level, um and I I should just add one other thing about this, which is, um, we have to make sure that we don't discriminate against people with without four-year college degrees. Uh, unfortunately, that is um, um, a stigma uh that we have to get over, and so I've actually authored legislation recently, with a republican named John James from Michigan, to prevent that type of discrimination. So, at the same time that we are training people to become, uh, let's say, semiconductor technical manufacturing Specialists- um, there must be a better word than what I came up with- we can't discriminate against them somehow in the hiring process when they go and look for these jobs, which unfortunately happens today, oftentimes through automated screening and other tools that employers use. Finally, I'll just say, uh, I just want to do a shout out for the national semiconductor uh Technical Center, the nstc. I think Chicago and Illinois would be an excellent place to locate that particular Hub, and so I'm going to be uh advocating very strongly for that me too. We'll say. We'll say, okay, should we go ahead and open up for for questions to make sure that people have time? I see one over Show more

here, um. Hi, can you hear me? Yes, yes, uh. So my name is karolina and I actually have three questions. Um they're very short, so um so the the first question I had is for Jenny. I hope I'm pronouncing your name correctly. Um I was excited to hear that you work for n before, because I'm also a bit of a standers uh nerd myself. Um so I wanted to um ask, I guess, you a question about what you see the role of Standards development being uh in the tech race, perhaps more generally, but also in the semiconductor race? Um. The second question I had uh had to do with Show more

um the sort of semiconductor issue being uh a concern to other nations as well. I work for a UK based cyber consultancy firm and I certainly know the UK government is um equally worried um about these issues. I was wondering what Show more

um sort of collaboration is this respected with perhaps other uh like-minded countries? And the last question um I have is: we're discussing about, you know, sort of tackling this challenge through uh developing capacities for the Next Generation. So how soon do you expect um you know we'll uh be able to sort of you know uh re this issue in if that makes sense? Um. So those are the three questions, thank you, I'm happy to start with a. I love when anyone talks about niston standard. Thank you, I can. I can uh dork out for you here. So I think I think one of the really critical things about standards is that standard setting helps Define how products are made and and delivered to individuals and all the things that we using every single day. And so why that matters is that the US and its allies and partners really need to show up for standard setting, and there's been a recent Trend lately where the PRC has made a concerted effort to show up to these standard setting meetings, uh, with their allies and partners and try to persuade the way standards are made. And so this really is a rallying call to all Show more

of you here in the audience. If you are part of local government, if you work for a startup, you too can be part of standard setting. There are organizations out there that you can join. You can reach directly to nist and they will help set you up, they will do training sessions and they will help bring you to the table. So your ideas, the concepts that you have, can ultimately be built into the design standards for the things that we want to use every day and that drive our economy and our security. So thank you for for raising that. Please, everyone, participate in standard setting. J, you want to add anything? Yeah, Show more

actually, nist is so important to uh, the chips and the science. Actually, uh, the Chip's office is currently in nist. So I think this is really important and that's all I'll say. Is that semiconductors, this entire effort from the, from the nstc side, it's actually being led by Nest, so that's how important this is. Okay, Congressman, you want to chime in? Well, I loved how the questioner said she had three questions. In Washington, we we have one question. I have three parts. Um, I think that, um, I I would just Echo the sentiments with regard to the standard setting. We think that this is going to be crucial for us to um, for instance, uh, prevent the PRC or the CCP from dominating, for instance, Show more

6G, uh or other Technologies of the future, uh, where standards are going to be vital for making sure, for instance, that people's privacy is maintained, that there's more open-source architecture involved, so more vendors can participate- it's not so vertically integrated, and, um that we um also set some parameters, for instance, uh, to prevent some of the ethical dilemmas from developing that we might have, whether it's about artificial intelligence or, um you know, any other technology of the future. Thank you, you have another question? Yes, hi everyone, my name is alao, director of tech ology, governance and policy for the city of Boston. Um, my question was sort of preface some of the answers given already, and it's about where: semiconductor. It's about policy complements to uh, creating the capacity for Semiconductor production. Um, some of the most uh Cutting Edge models that we have from the private sector have thrived in the US in the context of a very much lack of prize legislation. They're predicated on very much extracted commercial surveillance and M State surveillance. Um, and I wonder about the policy complement you would consider or or recommend pairing uh the chips act and other capacity building legislation with to ensure that we are moving towards uh AI development models that are less extractive in nature? Anybody want start? Well, I can start say something. So I think, uh, you know, it's very clear that the all the advances that you seeing in AI, they're really powered by semiconductors, right, so, at the end of the day, it's the chips underneath, it's the materials and the chips, and the chips are getting, you know, more and more powerful. They're taking more and more energy, obviously, which is another separate issue with sustainability, um, uh, and that's really why this is so important and that's why this panel today in this AI, the discussion of AI, you cannot have a discussion of AI without really talking about semiconductors. So, and I think the key, the key here is to make sure that, as we bring this capacity back, I mean, this is a- uh, you know, the chips Act is a great, great, really major step towards it. Um, if you look at in the US, there is Micron, there is Intel, uh, if you look across, and there's, of course, Samsung and tsmc, which are foreign based companies, Japanese and Taiwanese, but they have facilities in the US, then, of course there's facilities that um tsmc has in Taiwan and across the world, in Japan and Show more

other places also, companies like Samsung. So the question is that: how do you- and that's why I think the the global nature of this is so important- is that, how do you bring enough of this back and incentivize, while lowering the cost of manufacturing right at the end of the day? This is why we these these things moved offshore anyway, and one thing I like to also make a point is that it's just not the semiconductor manufacturing. That's a big, big piece of it, but it's a supply chain. It's all of the materials Show more

that are produced for that, and then also the packaging. You have to package these chips, you have to build them into systems, so that entire chain is what we should be thinking about. Certainly, the heart of this is the chips themselves, um, which could be used for power, for high speed or for computation. Uh, how do we think across the scale as we, as we talk about this topic? I'd love to add to that: absolutely so. Innovation beets Innovation, and when we're talking about how semiconductors interplay with ai, ai can really help with innovation in this space. So we're seeing um what's called pervasive Innovation, which is the application of digital tools to the physical world, sort of like our bits and atoms are are converging and we're going to a place where, for example, um AI can help us look at candidates for new materials and Fabrication and then help Show more

us down, select which materials to actually test, and in doing that, AI can help us have um more efficient production, perhaps um longer lasting materials, and also help us be more environmentally friendly in our production. So I think it's really important for industry and government and University collaboration to help, you Show more

know, really make this ecosystem work together and innovate, using AI to help move forward semiconductors, which then helps move forward AI. It's- it's all symbiotic. Yeah, love that. Now, Congressman, you want to add something? Well, I think, with regard to AI, if I understood the spirit of the question, I think that there need to be guard rails with regard to AI. So, even at the same time that artific intelligence is becoming more powerful, the models are becoming more powerful. We don't want to uh, for instance, give up privacy with regard to the data- people's user data- that that ends up feeding and teaching those models or training those models. Uh, we need to have transparency with regard to the algorithms that are used by those models, because what we've seen in the past is, unfortunately, certain AI models end up perpetrating uh forms of discrimination, uh, whether it's uh based on someone's skin color or their ethnicity. But basically, uh, we need to make sure that we understand, uh, what are the the algorithms powering those models. And then, finally, we can't repeat with AI, the the the problems that we've seen in social media, which is, uh, we can't create a safe harbor, for instance, where you know people who create AI models, uh, that lead to nefarious activities or bad outcomes or Reckless outcomes, negligent outcomes, are insulated from any of the consequences of that. Um, that is unfortunately something that I hear from my constituents all the time, which is that social media is out of control, and partly that is because in Washington we created a safe harbor, a loophole, where social media companies are not, uh, really on the hook for any of the consequences of the, of the material or the information or even the misinformation that is on those platforms. So we can't repeat that, uh, with AI. That's a great balance of perspectives. I'd love to add to that if Show more

I could. So I think there are a few tools out there that can really help in the space. First, the White House's new executive order directs department and agencies to look at new ways to address the risks associated with AI. One of the best tools out there is the- a nist- plugging nist again- nist- uh- AI risk management framework, which can help entities Map, Measure and manage and govern AI risk throughout the life cycle. On top of that, the special competitive studies project just released last week a framework for identifying High consequence AI use cases- and by high Show more

consequence it means high risk and high opportunity. So Regulators, industry, can Focus their attention on the areas that that, quite frankly, need the most attention, um, and I think you know, when all of those play out, we will find ways to mitigate the risk that the, the congressman raises, but also, you know, really hone in on those opportunities, Show more

especially in health and education, um, and climate. Yeah, important, so much to do. Thank you. Next question, please, hello. Thank you so much for being here. My name is Christine kyong. I served Silicon Valley as their Chief data officer and I now run a venture capital fund focused on Dual use Technologies, so I invest in civilian Technologies with government applications. Actually, Congressman, it's great to see you again. Um the nature of my work. I mean, I went from when I was in government. I served a community um that's extremely diverse, silicon, in Silicon Valley. Over 60% of my residents were, for are foreign born, and now, as a venture capitalist, I meet with early stage startups um led by immigrants, and so my question is about the global nature of innovation, right, and how feasible true decoupling is right, whether it's from the PRC or even the global supply chain? Um, o of the PRC. Yeah, great question. Who wants to start? Did I jump in? Yeah, please, sorry, I, you know, I. I I just wanted to um say that I don't think decoupling is either feasible or desirable, and I don't think it's going Show more

to happen in terms of any kind of divorce between, uh, the US and the PRC, or any other country for that matter. I think what we are going to see is we're going to see um diversification of Supply chains. We're going to see redundancy in Supply chains. We're already seeing the private sector, without the government doing anything, uh creating uh redundance Supply chains outside of China because of what happened during the pandemic, even aside from any national security risks or um any geopolitical events- if there were, God forbid, another pandemic or something that would cut off Supply chains- a lot of companies, a lot of Industries, want to make sure that they don't end up in the situation that they found themselves in in 20120, and so um I'm I, I I think that Show more

what companies are going increasingly do is um try to um uh have a portfolio, if you will, of options so that they're not solely dependent on one place for their um uh vital products. There's one uh area where I do think the US government is going to incentivize the nearshoring, onshoring or friend Shoring of products, and that's in kind of critical items like active pharmaceutical ingredients, where you have 70% of the- you know, I think 70% of Show more

the world's penicillin is made in the PRC, for instance- um that doesn't make sense if we were to have a uh um another pandemic where we required critical medicines and we we couldn't get it in time from China or elsewhere. Another issue is critical minerals, um things like lithium and Cobalt and manganese and graphite, those materials which are essential for the green energy economy and a lot of other um, uh Technologies of the future. Right now, 90% of that is processed in China, um, again, that is something where we're going to need to migrate some of the supply chain elsewhere. And then finally, um, I would just point out some of my Republican colleagues have mentioned that- energetics, which is the propulsive agent Even in our armaments. Unfortunately, we Source a lot of that abroad, in East Asia, of all places, and so I can see the US government, you know, say, look, we should probably make our own gunpowder, uh, for our US military here in the US, and uh, and so, with the exception of certain critical items, I don't think that the government is going to step in and start to have a chips act for all the different uh other items that we want to, um, you know, see, migrate to the US. If I can, actually that quick, absolutely so, yeah, I think U this entanglement is something that, uh, we need to see how to manage and untangle right, untangle some things, but at the same time, we have to find ways to work together as well across science and engineering, and education will always- I mean from academic perspective- I always tell our faculty and our students and will always stay away from certain areas of research when it comes to some International collaborations, right, like Quantum and and a few others, Advanced biotech or really Advanced AI, for example, with China. But we have collaborations in other areas. We have, uh, you know, academic institutions have Presence at other parts of the world. So I think it's one of those things where you have to, at some level, keep that bigger picture of trying to attract Talent- the world's best- to the, the, the US, and also try to, you know, see how we can educate them in our ways, in our educational system, even if it's there, uh. So, southeast Asia is very important. That was just mentioned earlier today and in general, uh, I mean, we're seeing- I'm also Show more

seeing that, uh, and it's already happening, uh, that some of the manufacturing facilities from China- they're actually also those companies- are setting up facilities in Vietnam and other other other parts of Southeast Asia already, uh, for whole hosts of Show more

reasons: perhaps for diversification, perhaps for some of these impending or ongoing geopolitical issues, but also because the cost of Labor is also starting to go up in China as well, as as they have brought in 300 million people from middle CL, from lower class to middle class, over the last 30 years. So I think there's a lot of very interesting things there. But in terms of how we, how we reach out to the world and how we bring the world here, it's something we need to really talk about in a lot more detail, lots more detail. Yeah, um, and there's one more question back there, but we have one minute- um, I want to make sure that, um, we, we share that our panelists will be available, except for our Congressman, of course, afterwards you can chase them down for more questions. I want to thank everybody for coming. Um, do Show more

you have a really quick? Can you ask? Ask something really quickly? Answer, Yeah, question. Yeah, my name is Elena harkes. I'm the executive director of current, so I'm I'm interested in the intersection uh between the supply chain stability of our semiconductor production and our climate resilience. I agree, Illinois is an amazing place to do this work, but part of that is because we have abundant water, a reliable grid, and I just wonder how that should be factored into National investment decisions and and the way that we are awarding projects for production. See, I have a really quick. That's not a quick. I mean, can we just, Congressman, can you forgive us a few seconds? Yeah, I, I think. Um, uh, all I would say is that I I have heard from some semiconductor uh manufacturers about um kind of environmental review and so forth, and I think that there are ways that we can uh work with them on this to respect the environment and, at the same time, hustle with regard to processing uh permits, uh and making sure that uh, we uh Show more

remain leaders in the semiconductor manufacturing space, and, of course, Illinois will do all of that faster, better and easier than anywhere else in the world. I sound like a cheerleader, or what? It's all true. It's all true, it's all good. That's your job, sorry, uh. You know the chips program office has already tried to incorporate those requirements um into its grants. Um you have to undergo Neer review, comply with clean air, Clean Water Act, Etc? Um, and that that's really important. But I think, on the local level, it's also important for uh localities and states to provide access to renewable resources, um to work with industry to figure out how to be more efficient and also, again, as The Innovation ecosystem, to use some of that R&D money perhaps towards figuring out how to uh better um address those actions. Yeah, and rece, I'm going to give you yeah, really quickly. Add to that. That. I think, uh, from a longer term perspective, we also need to be uh discovering new materials using AI, as you mentioned, or thinking about new materials that are used for Semiconductor processing that are more environmentally friendly. The fact is that there are materials like Arsenic and phosphine gases and arene and even photo resist. The materials that are used to make the patterns on the chip are materials that are not environmentally friendly uh and safe uh. So you know, we also need to be then doing Advanced R&D to look for alternatives to those materials. Yeah, okay, thank you. Thank you so much, panel. Thank you for all your questions, thank you for being here today and Show more