Key Takeaways:
- Singapore’s 2024–2026 survey estimates technical geothermal potential at more than 60 times its annual 60 TWh electricity consumption, with boreholes recording 122°C at 1.76 km and a feasibility study for next-generation systems now under way.
- Malaysia has over 100 hot-spring sites, including a stalled high-temperature project at Tawau that once targeted 100 MW, and recent research-level activity, but still has no operating geothermal power plants.
- The analysis attributes Malaysia’s slower pace to high exploration risk, the absence of dedicated de-risking policies and competition from easier solar and hydro options, while noting that targeted measures could still turn known resources into baseload capacity.
Singapore’s recent findings on deep geothermal resources have drawn regional attention, that highlights the potential scale for the city-state with no perceived natural resources. Preliminary estimates from a 2024–2026 non-invasive geophysical survey involving Chevron, Metatek Group, and Surbana Jurong put Singapore’s technical geothermal potential at more than 60 times its annual electricity consumption of around 60 TWh, which is enough, in theory, to power the city-state for decades if realized.
Boreholes near Sembawang Hot Spring recorded 122°C at about 1.76 km (higher than earlier 70°C readings at 1.12 km in Admiralty), linked to heat-producing granites with elevated heat flow roughly double the global continental average. Temperatures could reach ~230°C at 5 km under current gradients.
Singapore is not volcanic; the heat is radiogenic. EMA has commissioned a 15-month feasibility study starting late 2026, led by Surbana Jurong and GLJ, covering safety, technical viability, costs, and next-generation systems such as Enhanced or Advanced Geothermal Systems. No deployment decision has been made, as the extraction economics, urban constraints, and deep drilling remain open questions. However, Minister Tan See Leng has called the results “a very good start.”
Malaysia, by contrast, has long known of more than 100 natural hot-spring sites across Perak, Selangor, Melaka, Kedah, Pahang, Sabah, and Sarawak. Most are low-temperature and used mainly for tourism and recreation, such as Sungai Klah and Ulu Slim in Perak, Selayang and related sites in Selangor, Poring in Sabah, Ayer Hangat in Langkawi.
Only one medium-to-high-temperature resource has been systematically assessed. This was Apas Kiri/Tawau in Sabah, associated with Quaternary volcanism and temperatures of 220–236°C. Early estimates suggested tens of MW to over 100 MW potential. A private project by Tawau Green Energy secured a Power Purchase Agreement, FiT approval, and some government support for infrastructure around 2011–2015. Slimhole drilling confirmed temperatures above 200°C. The project stalled, and drilling stopped by late 2016, with the site showing no activity, and the permit was terminated in 2018 amid lack of progress. This led to views in Malaysia that geothermal was less cost-competitive than other renewables at the time.
Activity has since revived at a research and early-commercial level rather than utility scale. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) researchers, led by Associate Professor Ts. Dr. Mohd Hariri Arifin, have mapped sites and highlighted policy gaps.
The Malaysia Geothermal Association (MyGA) was formally established in 2025 with Dr Mohd Hariri as president. Geothermal Resources Sdn Bhd (GRSB), a UKM-linked startup, operates a research station at Ulu Slim (Perak), conducts 3G (geology, geochemistry, geophysics) studies, and signed a July 2025 MoU with Singapore-based Keystone Renewable Energy aligned with the National Energy Transition Roadmap (NETR), co-organizing the International Geothermal Week Malaysia 2025 at Ulu Slim.
Shallow work has occurred at Lojing (Kelantan). Proof-of-concept and low-temperature pilots, including Organic Rankine Cycle concepts for sites such as Ulu Slim or Hulu Langat are discussed. Sabah’s Energy Commission (ECoS) has expressed interest in reviving Tawau-area potential (up to ~100 MW) via request-for-proposal processes under the Sabah Energy Roadmap and Master Plan 2040 (SE-RAMP 2040), which prioritizes solar, hydro, wind, biomass, and storage while noting geothermal. Collaborations with New Zealand and Indonesian expertise have been explored. PETRONAS has been involved in some site studies, leveraging oil-and-gas subsurface experience.
These steps are real but remain early-stage. Malaysia has no operating geothermal power plants. The national grid is dominated by gas, coal, hydro, and rapidly scaling solar (Large-Scale Solar schemes, rooftop programs such as Solar ATAP). Official renewable targets emphasize lower-risk, faster-deploying options to raise renewable capacity toward 35% and beyond.
Why the slow pace in Malaysia?
High upfront exploration and drilling risk is universal in geothermal, where dry or underperforming wells can cost millions with uncertain returns. Malaysia lacks a dedicated national geothermal policy or robust exploration-risk mitigation instruments. In contrast, Indonesia has used programs such as the Geothermal Risk Mitigation Program with international climate finance to de-risk early drilling. FiT provisions exist but proved insufficient to carry Tawau to completion. Low-temperature resources in Peninsular Malaysia can support binary/ORC generation or direct-use applications (spas, drying, heating, cooling), yet electrical efficiency is lower, requiring more sites for meaningful output.
High-temperature potential is concentrated in Sabah, far from Peninsular demand centers, where undersea interconnection via the ASEAN Power Grid remains incomplete and capital-intensive. Competing priorities and administrative hurdles have historically favored solar and hydro. Land, environmental, and community considerations around protected or tourism sites add complexity.
Petronas’s repeated experience managing high-risk subsurface exploration offers a transferable advantage, as does proximity to Indonesian and Philippine expertise, being the world’s second- and third-largest geothermal producers, with multi-GW installed capacity and aggressive expansion plans. Singapore’s non-volcanic, granite-hosted approach and closed-loop concepts provide a relevant technical blueprint for much of Peninsular Malaysia.
Potential upside
Successful development would deliver high-capacity-factor baseload power (often >90%) that solar and wind cannot match, reducing reliance on gas and coal while supporting grid stability. Surface footprints are small relative to solar farms or biomass, preserving land. Direct-use heat can complement eco-tourism and industry.
In Sabah, geo-thermal could aid green hydrogen or heavy-industry decarbonization. Combined with regional interconnection, it could help balance intermittent renewables across ASEAN. Estimates of total Malaysian resource potential have historically been in the low hundreds of MW under optimistic scenarios once barriers are addressed; deeper mapping akin to Singapore’s nationwide survey could revise this upward.
Looking ahead to COP31 and beyond
With COP31 (9–20 November 2026) imminent, geothermal offers Malaysia a narrative of indigenous baseload clean energy distinct from solar-heavy strategies. Concrete progress—completing low-temperature pilots, finalizing a national policy with exploration insurance or risk-sharing, issuing competitive RFPs for Tawau-class sites, leveraging PETRONAS capabilities, and integrating with the ASEAN Power Grid—would strengthen that narrative. Singapore’s measured, data-driven path (survey → feasibility → possible next-gen deployment) is a practical model; Malaysia already has surface manifestations and one proven high-temperature system to build upon.
Malaysia is not “doing nothing.” However, research stations, an industry association, private MoUs, conferences, shallow drilling, and state-level interest exist have created an intent. The gap is between this groundwork and commercial-scale power generation, driven by exploration risk, policy incompleteness, and the relative ease of scaling solar. Closing that gap is feasible with targeted de-risking and prioritization, potentially turning known hot springs and Sabah’s volcanic resources into a meaningful part of the energy transition rather than a perpetual research topic.
