. We'll translate the text inside.
Let's translate paragraph by paragraph.
First paragraph: "A magnitude 7.1 earthquake that hit the Kumamoto region on July 28 cracked walls, leaked water, and cut the pure-water supply at Renesas Electronics' Kawashiri factory, forcing a production halt. The chipmaker said it will begin a phased restart on August 5, aiming to reach full wafer-input capacity in roughly 29 days."
Translation: "Et jordskjelv med styrke 7,1 som rammet Kumamoto-regionen 28. juli, sprakk vegger, lekket vann og kuttet tilførselen av renvann ved Renesas Electronics' Kawashiri-fabrikk, noe som tvang frem et produksjonsstopp. Chipprodusenten sa at de vil starte en gradvis gjenoppstart 5. august, med mål om å nå full wafer-input-kapasitet på omtrent 29 dager."
We need to ensure we use Norwegian terminology: "wafer-input" might be "wafer-inngang" but we can keep "wafer" as is, since it's a technical term. Also "chipmaker" -> "chipprodusent" or "brikkeprodusent". We'll use "chipprodusent".
Second paragraph: "The quake left the Kawashiri plant with wall cracks and water leakage, and it temporarily knocked out the pure-water supply that chip fabs rely on to keep production lines running. Renesas didn't say how many wafers were affected this time, but the company has scheduled a phased restart starting August 5. Full wafer-input capacity should return within about three weeks, or approximately 29 days."
Translation: "Jordskjelvet etterlot Kawashiri-anlegget med veggsprekker og vannlekkasje, og det slo midlertidig ut tilførselen av renvann som chipfabrikker er avhengige av for å holde produksjonslinjene i gang. Renesas sa ikke hvor mange wafere som ble påvirket denne gangen, men selskapet har planlagt en gradvis gjenoppstart fra 5. august. Full wafer-input-kapasitet bør være tilbake innen omtrent tre uker, eller omtrent 29 dager."
We use "wafere" as plural of "wafer" in Norwegian? Actually, "wafer" is often used as is, but we can say "wafere" for plural. We'll keep "wafer" as is, but in plural we can use "wafere" or just "wafer" (invariant). We'll use "wafere" for clarity.
Third paragraph: "The nearby Nishiki factory, which also sits in the quake zone, was back to pre-quake capacity on July 31, just three days after the tremor. That faster recovery suggests the damage at Kawashiri was more serious, though Renesas hasn't detailed the extent of the hit to output."
Translation: "Den nærliggende Nishiki-fabrikken, som også ligger i jordskjelvsonen, var tilbake til kapasiteten før jordskjelvet 31. juli, bare tre dager etter skjelvet. Den raskere gjenopprettelsen tyder på at skadene ved Kawashiri var mer alvorlige, selv om Renesas ikke har detaljert omfanget av produksjonstapet."
Fourth paragraph: "This isn't the first time Kawashiri has been shaken. In 2016, a similar earthquake at the same plant knocked out 35% of its wafers, cut sales by ¥14 billion, and reduced operating income by ¥8 billion. Back then, it took 35 days to restore full capacity. Renesas spent about ¥10 billion after the 2011 disaster to raise the seismic grade of its plants, including Kawashiri, but the 2026 quake still managed to halt production."
Translation: "Dette er ikke første gang Kawashiri har blitt rystet. I 2016 slo et lignende jordskjelv ved samme anlegg ut 35 % av waferne, reduserte salget med 14 milliarder yen og reduserte driftsinntektene med 8 milliarder yen. Den gang tok det 35 dager å gjenopprette full kapasitet. Renesas brukte omtrent 10 milliarder yen etter 2011-katastrofen for å heve den seismiske graden av anleggene sine, inkludert Kawashiri, men jordskjelvet i 2026 klarte likevel å stoppe produksjonen."
We need to note the year: 2026? The original says "the 2026 quake" - that seems odd because the article is about a quake in July 28, but it says 2026? Actually, the original says "the 2026 quake" - but the date is July 28, and we are in 2025? Possibly it's a typo? But we'll translate as is: "jordskjelvet i 2026". But we should check: The original says "the 2026 quake" - but the earthquake occurred on July 28, and the article mentions 2016 and 2011, so it might be a future date? Actually, the article is from August 2025? But it says 2026? We'll keep as is.
Fifth paragraph: "The company is a dominant supplier of automotive microcontrollers, so any prolonged disruption can ripple through carmakers that depend on those chips. The 29-day recovery timeline is shorter than the 2016 outage, but it's still a meaningful gap in supply."
Translation: "Selskapet er en dominerende leverandør av mikrokontrollere for biler, så enhver langvarig forstyrrelse kan få ringvirkninger for bilprodusenter som er avhengige av disse brikkene. Tidslinjen på 29 dager for gjenoppretting er kortere enn avbruddet i 2016, men det er fortsatt et betydelig gap i tilbudet."
Sixth paragraph: "Market reaction" heading: "Markedsreaksjon" (we'll translate headings as well).
Seventh paragraph: "Renesas stock took a hit in the days after the quake, though the initial drop wasn't entirely quake-related. Shares fell 10.45% on July 28, before the tremor, as part of a wider Asian chip selloff. They dropped another 8.43% on July 29, then jumped 13.45% on August 3 after the company reported strong second-quarter results."
Translation: "Renesas-aksjen fikk et slag i dagene etter jordskjelvet, selv om det første fallet ikke var helt jordskjelvrelatert. Aksjen falt 10,45 % 28. juli, før skjelvet, som en del av et bredere salg av asiatiske chip-aksjer. De falt ytterligere 8,43 % 29. juli, for så å hoppe 13,45 % 3. august etter at selskapet rapporterte sterke resultater for andre kvartal."
Note: "Shares" -> "Aksjen" (singular) or "Aksjene" (plural). We'll use "Aksjen" for consistency.
Eighth paragraph: "By August 10, Renesas closed at ¥3,825, just 1.1% below its pre-quake level. The Q2 numbers were solid: non-GAAP revenue grew 24.9% and operating profit rose 44.4% year-over-year. The company also issued a nine-month forecast guiding to further growth, but it's unclear whether that
