Reliable energy supply is essential for healthcare facilities, especially in areas such as cold chain storage, surgical operations, and intensive care units, where uninterrupted power is crucial. Providing sustainable and stable energy is a fundamental requirement for ensuring standard healthcare services. However, energy supply problems, particularly in underdeveloped countries, prevent effective healthcare services. In this regard, renewable energy sources are presented as a strong alternative to traditional systems. In recent years, providing energy for healthcare facilities in rural areas with renewable energy sources has been the subject of numerous studies. However, these studies generally take the form of systemic assessments, with limited studies supported by numerical analysis. On the other hand, various options such as solar, wind, fossil-based, and hybrid systems offer distinct advantages and disadvantages depending on various factors such as cost, seasonal production, and carbon footprint. This study applies the CRITIC (Criteria Importance Through Intercriteria Correlation) method to determine which criteria are more discriminatory and which tend to overlap when evaluating alternative energy supply sources. The analysis revealed that Application Services, Technical Maintenance, and CO \(_2\) Emissions were the most influential criteria in differentiating renewable energy supply alternatives, whereas Modularity & Scalability and Safety & Environment exhibited the least variance across options. The results obtained aim to support more systematic and evidence-based energy planning for healthcare infrastructures.