Microgrids have earned a reputation for flexibility, resilience, and independence. And rightly so. But there’s a persistent misconception I continue to see across industries: if a microgrid can integrate a popular generation source, then it should.
That assumption is costly.
Yes, hybrid microgrids can technically accommodate a wide range of generation sources. But as the adage goes, just because you can, does not mean you should.
Why not? Because not all generation sources deliver the same value and treating them as interchangeable often leads to inefficiencies.
The challenge isn’t whether the DERs (aka distributed energy resources) can work together. It’s whether they should for long-term success.
The “any DER will do” myth
Many organizations approach DER selection with a checkbox mentality: add solar, add storage, add backup generation, call it a day. What often gets overlooked is that microgrids are systems, not collections of assets.
When customers fail to optimize their DER mix, the consequences show up quickly:
Higher operational and lifecycle costs
Underperforming systems during outages
Inaccurate or incomplete emissions reporting
Assets that look good on paper but don’t align with real-world load profiles
Disqualification from demand response programs
Microgrids are customizable by design, but not all configurations are created equal.
Not all DERs create the same value
Each DER comes with its own strengths, limitations, and ideal use cases. Understanding those distinctions is critical.
Solar PV works best where sunlight and space are abundant but dramatically benefits from storage to ensure flexibility.
Wind can be highly effective in the right geography, yet its intermittency means it rarely stands alone.
Energy storage provides flexibility and resiliency, but only for a limited time.
Reciprocating engines (diesel, natural gas, or renewable fuels like HVO) vary widely in emissions profiles and compliance requirements, but remain critical as firm, dispatchable resources.
Fuel cells offer low-emission, quiet baseload generation but can be expensive.
Choosing the “right” DER mix is contextual
There is no universal microgrid blueprint. The best DER strategy depends entirely on where you operate, how you consume energy, and what you’re optimizing for.
Organizations evaluating DERs should start by asking:
What does your actual load profile look like—today and five years from now?
How do local climate and geography influence renewable performance?
Which objectives matter most: cost reduction, resilience, emissions reporting, or all three?
What regulatory and permitting realities shape our options?
Which incentives or demand response programs materially change the business case?
Can the system scale as operations grow or electrification increases?
When these questions drive design decisions, microgrids stop being “projects” and start becoming strategic infrastructure assets.
A Strategy for the Long Term
In many cases, the most effective solution is not the most complex one. Hybrid configurations (or even a well-chosen generator using renewable fuels) can deliver a stronger benefit chosen generator using renewable fuels) can deliver a stronger benefit-chosen generator using renewable fuels) can deliver a stronger benefitto -toresilience -resilience ratio than an overengineered system.
The key is intentional design.
Microgrids succeed when DERs are selected not because they’re available, but because they’re aligned with your company’s goals and long term -term strategy.
The takeaway? Microgrids are powerful platforms, but value is optimized when the right tools are applied in the right way, in the right place.
If you’re designing a microgrid, don’t settle for “any energy resource will do.” Aim for the right generation sources for you.
To learn more about common microgrid misconceptions, get the free PDF:
Demystifying Microgrids: Truth About Microgrids and Distributed Energy