News & Insights

Pharmaceutical manufacturing is among the most energy-intensive sectors in North America. From sterile production lines to research labs, facilities run around the clock with tightly controlled environments that demand 24/7 heating, cooling, and ventilation. For decades, fossil-fuel systems carried that load.

Today, fossil-fuel based systems are becoming both an environmental liability and an economic burden, which is why facility leaders face a pressing question: how to maintain reliability while meeting ambitious corporate sustainability goals for decarbonization and managing operating costs. This is where geothermal energy is gaining attention, not as a standalone fix, but as a strategy that supports both sustainability commitments and the bottom line.

Why geothermal matters for pharma now

Pharma facilities are uniquely positioned to benefit from geothermal energy: their operations never stop, and clean rooms, labs, and production lines require constant environmental control, which means continuous heating and cooling loads. Instead of wasting that energy, geothermal systems can capture, recycle, and redistribute it across the campus.

The appeal is twofold:

• Operational efficiency. By tapping the earth as a thermal reservoir, facilities can stabilize energy costs and reduce exposure to fossil fuel volatility.
• Sustainability performance. With corporate decarbonization goals taking center stage, geothermal provides a practical path to lowering emissions while supporting ESG commitments.

For many organizations, the draw goes beyond meeting sustainability targets. Geothermal strengthens resilience, reduces long-term costs, and demonstrates to investors, partners, and employees that sustainability commitments are backed by tangible action.

Start with energy, not boreholes

For pharmaceutical campuses, the smartest first step in a geothermal plan is understanding and optimizing the site’s energy flows.

Most facilities generate large amounts of heat from equipment and process loads, even in winter. Too often, that heat is wasted through cooling towers. By creating interconnected hot- and chilled-water networks, facilities can capture and reuse this energy across the campus. The result: simultaneous heating and cooling that shrinks the geothermal system required later.

This strategy avoids oversizing, saves millions in unnecessary boreholes, and creates a solution tailored to the actual load profile. Engineering-led planning applies geothermal where it delivers the best return, turning it from an expensive one-size-fits-all fix into a right-sized investment.

Open loop vs. closed loop: two pathways to geothermal

Pharma leaders weighing geothermal options often ask what type of system makes the most sense. Two primary approaches dominate: closed-loop and open-loop systems.

Closed loop. The most common design, closed-loop systems circulate a fluid through hundreds of boreholes drilled into the ground. Heat pumps move energy between the ground and the building, providing heating in the winter and cooling in the summer. Closed-loop systems can be deployed almost anywhere with sufficient land for drilling, but they require significant space. On existing campuses, they are often located below parking lots, green spaces, or other areas that will not be used for future construction. For new construction, borefields can be located beneath the building with proper preparation to accommodate site prep in the schedule.

Open loop. By contrast, open-loop systems pump water from wells constructed in a high-capacity aquifer, pass it through heat exchangers, and then return the water to the same aquifer via injection wells. Each well has a much higher energy capacity than a closed loop bore, so significantly fewer wells are required. Additionally, wells can be installed in tight urban environments or around existing buildings where borefields aren’t always feasible. Because the footprint is smaller, the capital cost can be a fraction of closed-loop systems, improving ROI dramatically. Importantly, in modern open-loop systems, every gallon of water pumped from the aquifer is returned, protecting groundwater resources.

While less familiar to many facility managers, open-loop geothermal is not new; industries have been using groundwater for process cooling for decades. Today’s designs simply apply more sustainable reinjection practices. The caveat: open-loop systems require the right hydrogeologic conditions. High-capacity aquifers aren’t available everywhere, and regulatory oversight is typically more stringent.

Site and infrastructure considerations

What makes geothermal viable for a pharmaceutical site? The answer varies by geography, hydrogeology, infrastructure, and project type.

Greenfield opportunities. New campuses with open land are the simplest place to start. Borefields can be incorporated under planned buildings or parking areas, avoiding future disruption. The challenge comes with fast-track projects in which construction schedules may not allow time for drilling, forcing temporary systems until geothermal can be phased in.

Urban and dense campuses. Many pharmaceutical facilities are located in cities, where land is scarce. Here, open-loop geothermal can be a game-changer. With fewer wells required and a much smaller footprint than closed-loop systems, open-loop systems can be threaded into constrained sites—even in courtyards, boulevards, or small green spaces. By leveraging aquifers, ponds, lakes, rivers, or existing dewatering wells, open-loop systems provide large amounts of heating and cooling capacity. Successful examples exist across both US and Canadian cities where hydrogeology supports this approach, such as the Treasure Island Resort and Casino on the Prairie Island Indian Community lands in Minnesota and the evolv1 office building (the first certified Zero-Carbon Building in Canada).

Existing facilities. Retrofitting existing campuses is often more feasible than facility managers assume. Geothermal systems can take on much of the building load—heating, cooling, ventilation, and hot water—without disrupting production. Steam-driven chillers can be replaced with heat-pump chillers, and existing steam piping can be repurposed for hot-water distribution. In many cases, only a return line needs to be added, keeping retrofit work to a minimum.

The caveat on steam. While geothermal systems can reliably provide hot water up to 160-176°F—suitable for most building loads—they cannot yet replace the high-temperature steam needed for certain sterilization and production processes, such as water for injection (WFI) systems. Pilot programs are underway to develop heat pumps that generate steam, and some European manufacturers are introducing units capable of reaching 248°F. For now, most North American pharma manufacturing facilities maintain steam for production while using geothermal for building heating, cooling, and humidity control.

ROI and the long-term impact

For facility managers, the most pressing question is often return on investment. Geothermal systems do require significant upfront capital, but long-term economics can be compelling, especially when paired with infrastructure replacement cycles.

Capital timing. The strongest ROI cases occur when facilities are already facing boiler and chiller replacements. Instead of investing in new fossil-fuel systems that will lock in emissions for decades, managers can redirect those capital dollars toward geothermal systems.

Operating savings. Closed-loop geothermal systems require minimal maintenance. Unlike cooling towers and boilers, they use far fewer chemicals, no makeup water, and generate little blowdown. Routine tasks may include occasional water sampling and corrosion inhibitor adjustments, but these are minor compared to the daily oversight of steam systems. Open loop systems typically require more maintenance than closed loop, however unique design techniques are used to minimize this.

Staffing advantage. Pharma plants often staff operators around the clock to manage steam. Geothermal systems do not have the same need. Systems can be monitored remotely, freeing skilled staff for other critical work and helping address the growing shortage of experienced steam operators in North America.

Geography. Drilling costs vary widely by region impacting the costs of systems. Where high-capacity aquifers exist, capital costs for an open-loop system can be a fraction of closed-loop systems—often changing the ROI calculus significantly.

Future-proofing. As higher-temperature heat pumps become commercially available, campuses already designed with geothermal infrastructure will be able to extend decarbonization into production processes with minimal changes. Early adopters position themselves for faster compliance with any future carbon mandates.

Insights from recent projects

Pharma facility leaders already juggle reliability, sustainability, and cost in some of the most demanding environments in North America. From recent projects, a few patterns are emerging:

• Networks matter. Facilities that connect heating and cooling loads across campuses are finding it easier to right-size geothermal systems and avoid overspending.
• Early planning pays off. Greenfield sites allow the most freedom to design for geothermal from day one, but retrofit projects are also proving practical when integration is considered upfront.
• Alignment drives progress. When sustainability teams and plant engineers work together, strategies move beyond reports and into implementation.
• The long view counts. With campuses designed to operate for decades, investments that look heavy on day one often prove their value many times over a 30-year horizon.

How Salas O’Brien can help

Decarbonizing pharmaceutical campuses isn’t simple. Each site has unique load profiles, infrastructure conditions, and business drivers. What works on one campus may not translate directly to another. That’s why Salas O’Brien takes an engineering-led, collaborative approach.

Our teams across North America bring deep experience in both closed-loop and open-loop geothermal systems—along with the energy modeling expertise to right-size solutions before the first well is drilled. We help facility leaders:

• Map simultaneous heating and cooling loads to uncover efficiency gains before geothermal is added.
• Evaluate retrofit strategies that minimize disruption to operations while reducing long-term costs.
• Compare total cost of ownership for traditional replacements versus geothermal investments.
• Plan phased implementations that align with capital budgets and future growth.

Most importantly, we meet facility leaders where they are—whether navigating corporate sustainability commitments, preparing for equipment renewal, or building new facilities. With the right strategy, geothermal becomes more than an energy system. It’s a tool to strengthen resilience, support corporate goals, and keep critical environments performing at their best.

To talk about your project, reach out to our contributors below.

For media inquiries on this article, reach out to [email protected].