## 4 Results and Discussion  
This section evaluates the results obtained after the optimization of different hybrid configurations in an attempt to determine the most optimal in terms of minimized cost and emission. It assesses the outcomes to ascertain the impact of renewable energy resources on healthcare facilities in remote areas/off-grid locations and the results from the four case studies are discussed based on economic and environmental impacts. **Case 1:** In this case study, the healthcare facility loads are supplied through the diesel generators with a peak capacity of 10 kW per generator, because it is designed such that no other source is available. The behavior of the three generators based on their power output is presented in Table 4. It is observed that the first generator operates at its peak capacity daily, while the second generator only reach its peak capacity when the hospital load is at its peak demand between 09:00 to 16:00 h each day. The third generator serves as a power reserve to support the power generation when both generators cannot meet the peak load demanded by the healthcare facilities at the peak period of the day as shown in Figure 1.  
Figure 3 presents the optimal power produced from diesel generators and Figure 4 presents the performance evaluation of the economic and emission parameters of this configuration. Since there is no other alternative source to supplement the diesel generators during operation, a large cost is incurred from the continuous operation of multiple diesel generators. Therefore, the minimized cost of running the three diesel generators is NGN 10,769/kWh. The environmental implication of running the three generators shows that this configuration produces an emission of 2536 lb/h. The high emission value obtained illustrates the environmental impacts the diesel generators have on the rural community. Figure 2: Wind speed of the site location. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Time (h)** & **Load Demand** & **Generator 1** & **Generator 2** & **Generator 3** \\  & **(kWh)** & **(kWh)** & **(kWh)** & **(kWh)** \\ \hline
01:00 & 12.58 & 10.00 & 2.58 & - \\ \hline
02:00 & 12.34 & 10.00 & 2.34 & - \\ \hline
03:00 & 11.17 & 10  
**Case 2:** This configuration uses diesel generators and wind turbines to meet the healthcare facility load. Table 5 presents the daily behavioral pattern of the diesel generators and the wind turbine generator. It can be observed that the integration of a wind turbine generator reduced the number of diesel generators in operation as shown in Figure 5. This in turn will reduce the level of degradation of the diesel generators as less stress in their operation reduces wear and tear. The economic and emission performance of the system can be seen in Figure 6. It shows that the operating conditions of the system considerably improved when compared to a system with only diesel generators in operation. The operational cost of running the system drastically reduced to NGN 9994/kWh and the emission sequentially reduced to 2385 lb/h because less generators are utilized and wind turbine generation produces no air pollution. Figure 4: Case 1: Performance evaluation of economics and emissions. Figure 5: Case 2: Power output variation from diesel and wind turbine generators. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Time (h)** & **Load Demand** & **Generator 1** & **Generator 2** & **WTG (kWh)** \\ \hline
01:00 & 12.58 & 6.53 & - & 6.05 \\ \hline
02:00 & 12.4 & 6.4 & - & 6 \\ \hline
03:00 & 11. **Case 3:** In this case study, a solar PV system is added to the diesel generators to meet the required load demand of the rural clinic. Table 6 presents the power generated by the diesel generators and PV system. The results obtained in Figure 7 show that the power produced by the diesel generators significantly reduced owing to the presence of the PV system. However, there were inconsistencies in the availability of the PV system, which poses a setback to the configuration.