Microgrid
ProjectsSubmit a project

Home / Directory / Southampton Microgrid Feasibility Study

North America / Commercial & demonstration

Southampton Microgrid Feasibility Study

Current status, energy mix, organizations, suppliers, equipment, controls, reported specifications, and project updates—with source-level citations.

CoverageDetailed public record
Named organizations9
System facts20
Sources reviewed5
Evidence reviewed2026-07-20

Southampton's NY Prize work ended as a Stage 1 feasibility study; the proposed community microgrid was not built. The August 2016 study modeled a Village of Southampton system serving Southampton Hospital and other municipal, school, water, business, and residential loads. The concept combined existing emergency generators and small PV arrays with a new 1.5 MW hospital CCHP plant, a 2 MW natural-gas reciprocating engine at the Department of Public Works, 300 kW of new PV, and a 200 kW/800 kWh battery. It assumed a third-party microgrid energy-services company would finance and operate new DER while PSEG Long Island retained the distribution system. The base economic case projected a 1.1 benefit-cost ratio; a much stronger case depended on crediting an avoided transmission upgrade. The capital plan also assumed a hypothetical $7 million of NYSERDA support. Southampton was not among the 11 projects selected for NY Prize Stage 2 in 2017, and no evidence of procurement, permitting, financing, or construction was found through July 2026. The town's current webpage merely hosts the old report and is not evidence of an active project.

Research status
Feasibility-only; Stage 1 report completed in 2016, not selected for NY Prize Stage 2, and no build was identified.
Historical classification
Community
Reported capacity
See component specifications
Coordinates
40.88509, -72.38016
Evidence note: “Every company” cannot be proven from public material alone. This page lists every organization found in the recovered record and reviewed sources, preserves unknown roles, and explicitly marks undisclosed controller or equipment details.
Report missing evidenceResearch methodology

Project delivery

Who was involved in Southampton Microgrid Feasibility Study?

9 publicly identified organizations. Where a recovered source named a participant without explaining its work, the role remains explicitly unspecified.

Organization

Burns Engineering

Engineering consultant [2]

Organization

D&B Engineers and Architects

Engineering consultant [2]

Organization

GE Energy Consulting

Electrical-system, dispatch, and economic modeling consultant [2]

Organization

Global Common LLC

Lead feasibility-study consultant and proposed project developer [2][5]

Organization

National Grid

Natural-gas utility assumed to supply proposed dispatchable generators [2]

Organization

New York State Energy Research and Development Authority

NY Prize Stage 1 funder and selection authority [2][4]

Organization

PSEG

Publicly named participant; role not specified in the recovered record [1]

Organization

PSEG Long Island

Distribution utility that would have retained ownership and operation of the electrical distribution system [2]

Organization

Town of Southampton

NY Prize applicant and study sponsor [2][3]

System evidence

Energy mix, capacity, and specifications

Values can describe different project phases, generation sources, storage systems, or other components. Source citations are attached to each figure so discrepancies remain visible.

Storage
NA [1]
Modeled service area
Southampton Hospital and other critical facilities plus approximately 150 small businesses and 800 residences in the Village of Southampton [2]
Modeled load
5.332 MW coincident peak, 5.980 MW non-coincident peak, and 23.437 GWh annual consumption; the hospital represented about 1.515 MW and 6.784 GWh [2]
Proposed DER capacity
Approximately 6.25 MW of existing and new generation/storage power capacity, plus demand curtailment [2]
Proposed new thermal generation
1.5 MW natural-gas CCHP at the hospital and 2.0 MW natural-gas reciprocating generation at the Department of Public Works [2]
Existing backup generation modeled
Two 800 kW dual-fuel hospital generators, 200 kW high-school natural-gas generator, and 343 kW police natural-gas generator; another 78 kW of small backup units was noted but not assumed interconnected [2]
Solar and storage concept
Existing 100 kW and 10 kW PV, proposed 300 kW elementary-school PV, and proposed 200 kW/800 kWh battery at the Suffolk County Water Authority site [2]
Demand and thermal measures
126 kW of dispatchable load curtailment and a hospital absorption chiller estimated to reduce electrical peak by about 289 kW [2]
Modeled capital structure
$11.989 million project capital, including a hypothetical $7 million of NYSERDA grant support; this was a feasibility assumption, not money awarded or spent on construction [2]
Modeled economics
Without an avoided transmission upgrade: $3.87 million NPV, 1.1 benefit-cost ratio, and 9.3% IRR. With the avoided-upgrade benefit: $24.2 million NPV, 1.6 benefit-cost ratio, and 28.1% IRR [2]

Controls and hardware

Equipment and controller details

Manufacturer and model are shown only when a source names them. Generic descriptions are not converted into guessed product assignments.

01

Proposed CCHP

Model not publicly disclosed

1.5 MW natural-gas hospital plant with heat recovery and absorption chilling; vendor and model were deferred to a later project stage that did not occur [2]

02

Proposed reciprocating generation

Model not publicly disclosed

2.0 MW natural-gas unit at the Department of Public Works; manufacturer/model not selected [2]

03

Proposed battery

Model not publicly disclosed

200 kW/800 kWh, four-hour storage system at the water-authority site; chemistry and supplier not selected [2]

04

Proposed solar

Model not publicly disclosed

300 kW array at Southampton Elementary School in addition to 110 kW of existing PV identified by the study [2]

05

Proposed controls and switchgear

Model not publicly disclosed

Microgrid controller, protective relaying, sectionalizing, and utility coordination were conceptual; vendors and final interconnection design were left for Stage 2 [2]

Technical record

Architecture, performance, and project updates

Concise technical facts, milestones, operating results, and later developments. Dated notes distinguish historical design claims from current evidence.

  • Ownership model

    The study proposed a third-party microgrid energy-services company to finance, own, and operate new DER. PSEG Long Island would continue owning and operating distribution infrastructure, requiring contractual and operational coordination. [2]

  • Modeling method

    DER-CAM and engineering/economic studies sized and dispatched a conceptual portfolio. Modeled results are not as-built performance, equipment orders, or interconnection approvals. [2]

  • Economic dependency

    The strongest benefit case depended on avoiding a transmission investment and on substantial grant funding. Removing the avoided-upgrade credit reduced the benefit-cost ratio to only 1.1. [2]

  • Program outcome

    NYSERDA selected 11 Stage 2 projects in March 2017. The Long Island selections included Huntington, Rockville Centre, and Freeport, but not Southampton. [4]

  • Current-status interpretation

    The town and developer still make the feasibility report available, but no primary evidence was found for later awards, contracts, construction, commissioning, or operations. It should remain a feasibility-study record. [3][5][4]

Provenance

5 sources

Primary owner, government, university, supplier, and engineering sources are preferred. Archived references preserve claims whose original pages moved or disappeared.

  1. [1]
    Recovered Microgrid Projects record

    Internet Archive · Archived source · captured 2021-04-20

  2. [2]
    Southampton Community Microgrid NY Prize Stage 1 Feasibility Study

    Town of Southampton / NYSERDA · Primary source

  3. [3]
    Southampton Community Microgrid

    Town of Southampton · Primary source

  4. [4]
    NY Prize Announces Stage 2 Microgrid Winners

    Microgrid Knowledge · Secondary research

  5. [5]
    Southampton Reliable Energy Project

    Global Common LLC · Primary source

Continue exploring

Related projects in North America