Asianometry Podcast Summary

Episode: Chip Fabs in Space: Technically Possible, Completely Impractical
Host: Jon Y
Date: February 22, 2026

Episode Overview

Jon Y explores the question: Could we manufacture semiconductors (chips) in space instead of on Earth? Prompted by recent trends in orbital manufacturing startups and big tech visions for space-based AI data centers, Jon dissects the technical, physical, and economic factors that make “space fabs” technically possible—yet profoundly impractical compared to terrestrial fabrication.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Inspiration Behind Space Fabs

• Recent startups are raising millions for in-orbit manufacturing—Varda Space (pharmaceuticals), StarCloud (data centers), with big ideas from Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos about building vast utilities in space.
• “A few people on the Internet have riffed off these trends and ideas to also ask, why not do semiconductors in space too? Bezos himself said all the way back in 2016, we can build gigantic chip factories in space. Sure we can. But it’s not going to be practical.” [01:10]

2. Advantages Cited for Space-Based Data Centers

• Energy: Space-based solar panels are much more efficient; possible 3-10x boost due to lack of atmosphere (“no clouds or atmosphere, solar panels generate anywhere from three to ten times more power”).
• Cooling: Implied benefit of space’s coldness, though heat dissipation in vacuum is harder (“in a vacuum, heat dissipation can only happen via radiation”).
• Community: No NIMBY problems—“there are no local residents in space that I personally know of, so presumably we bypass that.” [01:55]

3. The Core Benefit: Free Clean Vacuum

• Vacuum Quality: “The vacuum of space in low Earth orbit...measured at about 10⁻⁵ to 10⁻⁸ Pa.” That meets cleanroom and UHV (ultra-high vacuum) thresholds for advanced fabs.
• Economic Savings: On Earth, about half a fab’s cleanroom operating costs are for HVAC; in space, “we can get the strong vacuum for basically free. Just open a side vent to the outside.” [05:30]
• Atomic Oxygen: A notable risk in orbit, but could be mitigated by vent placement (“Pfeiffer recommends placing those side vents in the space fab's wake so away from incoming oxygen atoms.”) [06:50]

4. Harsh Space Environment: Radiation and Temperature Extremes

• Radiation Damage: Space radiation can knock atoms from lattice points and degrade chips. “Even a small amount of lattice damage can have significant consequences” as transistor feature sizes shrink. [09:30]
• Temperature Swings: “Temperatures can swing from minus 220 to positive 220 degrees Celsius.” Sensitive fab tools (and wafers) would require extreme thermal management.
• Heat Rejection: “The primary method to remove heat in a vacuum is to radiate it away… the sheer amount of heat to dissipate away looks like a significant obstacle.” [11:15]

5. Microgravity: Novel Physics, Serious Challenges

• Liquids in Microgravity: Behave unpredictably, complicating processes that depend on gravity or conventional containment (“when by themselves, they take a spherical shape… on surfaces they spread out into thin films”). [13:09]
• Some Processes Could Improve: Vapor-based depositions (CVD/PVD) might be gravity-neutral or even improved.
• Crystal Growth: Floating zone method could yield purer silicon crystals, but uncontrolled liquid behavior is a big problem (“The big problem are when things involve liquids. In microgravity, liquids lose their predicted behavior, causing breaking changes to the tool.”) [15:32]

6. Wet Processing: Core Bottleneck

• Cleaning: Currently relies on wet processes (ultrapure water, acids, and bases). In space, “exposed liquids start boiling off,” so dry methods like plasma clean would have to be substituted—slower and riskier. [17:10]
• Photoresist Application & Lithography: Spin coating (liquid-based) fails in microgravity; experimental dry resists lack throughput. “In microgravity, the photoresist will not stay on the wafer... So we must turn to non liquid dry photoresists.” [20:30]
• Immersion Lithography: Impossible—cannot use pools of ultrapure water between optic and wafer in vacuum/microgravity; would require a pressurized and radically redesigned system. “To me this is a no go from the very start.” [23:55]
• EUV Lithography: Theoretically suitable, but “an EUV NXE3300 machine is 150,000 kg and... uses an immense amount of energy… How are you going to dissipate one megawatt of heat generated by the machine? That is 14 times more than what the International Space Station’s radiators reject…” [25:58]

7. Fabrication Steps with No Dry Substitutes

• Chemical Mechanical Polishing (CMP): Essential for planarizing wafers; requires a liquid slurry, unworkable in microgravity. “The slurry has always been there, so we need something entirely new. What that is, I have no suggestions.” [32:18]

8. Wafer Handling, Supply, and Maintenance

• Tool and Wafer Handling: Vacuum suction (common on Earth) cannot work in a vacuum; microgravity complicates mechanical manipulation (“The robot arm can pinch the wafer at the edges, but that risks damage. So probably your best bet is something along the lines of an electrostatic chuck.”) [34:44]
• Supply Chains: Constant resupply of chemicals, parts, and engineers is needed for a fab. If something breaks, “They cannot wait to take the next SpaceX rocket up.” [36:03]

9. Economic Outlook: Space vs. Earth

• Historic Analysis:
  • Pfeiffer’s 2000 thesis: Even with mass-optimized, vacuum-native tools, space wafer costs would be twice those on-planet at $5,000/kg launch costs.
  • At $1,000/kg, “space based operating costs would be 12% higher than that on Earth.”
• Evolving Industry Context: Fabs are now far more demanding than 25 years ago (“The lithography issues alone I feel are untenable.”) [41:33]
• Main Point: The value of free vacuum in space is now “largely a solved problem in the fab” (i.e., not worth the tradeoffs and costs). [44:28]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “A space fab would be unfathomably cool, but this juice is not worth the squeeze.” [45:02]
• “It is technically possible, but so is me learning how to dunk. I don’t think it is anywhere near economically practical.” [46:35]
• “A space fab cannot use existing process nodes nor can it use existing semiconductor manufacturing equipment. So we have to develop both from scratch at the same time—a complete custom job from the ground floor.” [46:52]
• “Why not just send the chips up into space? ... More well studied, smaller in scope and the conditions cannot be as easily achieved on the ground.” [49:20]

Structurally Significant Timestamps

• [01:10] – Introduction of Bezos’s vision and Jon’s skepticism.
• [05:30] – Free vacuum in LEO; economic savings potential.
• [09:30] – Radiation tolerance and risk with shrinking transistor sizes.
• [11:15] – Thermal extremes in orbit and heat rejection obstacles.
• [13:09] – Microgravity effects on liquids and potential improvements for some processes.
• [17:10] – Removal of wet processing; challenges with dry alternatives.
• [20:30] – Photoresist and lithography process breakdowns in microgravity.
• [25:58] – Scale and energy requirements of EUV machines; impracticality in orbit.
• [32:18] – Unsurmountable barrier: lack of a dry alternative to CMP.
• [34:44] – Wafer handling issues in vacuum and microgravity.
• [41:33] – Updated economic analysis; lithography urgency.
• [44:28] – Perspective from current tool engineers/fab staff.
• [46:52] – Fundamental incompatibility with existing manufacturing.
• [49:20] – Suggestion: focus on smaller, specialty materials production in space.

Conclusion & Final Host Take

• Jon concludes that while building a semiconductor fab in space is a fun intellectual exercise and technically possible, it’s “nowhere near economically practical.” Existing process flows and tool designs are so gravity- and atmosphere-dependent—and so thoroughly optimized for Earth—that starting over for a space environment is likely a nation-state endeavor, not a Silicon Valley moonshot.
• The only plausible early use cases for space manufacturing are in creating specialty materials (like high-purity crystals or exotic alloys) or leveraging microgravity/vacuum in limited, targeted ways—not in mass chip production.

Tone Note: Jon’s language is analytical, candid, and skeptical—often leavened with dry sarcasm and an engineer’s eye for details.

Utility: This episode is ideal for listeners interested in the cutting edge of semiconductor manufacturing, space tech hype, and grounded economic analysis. It debunks recent space manufacturing enthusiasm while explaining the immense technical and physical constraints behind the vision.