Wind Turbine Payback in Allen County, IN
Wind turbine payback in Allen County
No. The turbine wears out before it pays for itself.
At 30 m, the height a home turbine tower usually reaches, the wind in Allen County, IN averages 5.9 m/s (13.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 18,964 kWh a year, worth $3,231 at IN's 17.04¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 31 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Allen County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Allen County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.3 m/s at the hub against 5.9 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,115 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,896, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 26¢/kWh, 1.5 times what IN pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.3 m/s instead of 5.9. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of IN
Allen County is the 988th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in IN is Lake County at 6.17 m/s, payback 28 years.
Month by month in Allen County
January is the strongest month here, at 6.80 m/s and about 2,174 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.41 m/s and 746 kWh, so the best month makes 2.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 52% of the year's output in Allen County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.80 m/s | 2,174 kWh | $370 |
| February | 6.68 m/s | 1,894 kWh | $323 |
| March | 6.53 m/s | 2,009 kWh | $342 |
| April | 6.82 m/s | 2,115 kWh | $360 |
| May | 5.85 m/s | 1,578 kWh | $269 |
| June | 5.11 m/s | 1,091 kWh | $186 |
| July | 4.50 m/s | 795 kWh | $135 |
| August | 4.41 m/s | 746 kWh | $127 |
| September | 5.01 m/s | 1,036 kWh | $177 |
| October | 6.15 m/s | 1,768 kWh | $301 |
| November | 6.52 m/s | 1,938 kWh | $330 |
| December | 6.54 m/s | 2,014 kWh | $343 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Allen County averages 4.59 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.63 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.228, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 15,176 to 24,362 kWh a year, 61% more, before counting the extra cost of the taller tower. Why tower height decides it explains the shear behind these numbers.
| Hub height | Average wind | Output | Payback |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20 m | 5.38 m/s | 15,176 kWh | 39 years |
| 30 m | 5.9 m/s | 18,972 kWh | 31 years |
| 40 m | 6.3 m/s | 21,937 kWh | 27 years |
| 50 m | 6.63 m/s | 24,362 kWh | 24 years |
Counties around Allen County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, DeKalb County, averages 5.98 m/s.
- DeKalb County, IN: 5.98 m/s, 19,556 kWh, payback 30 years (21 mi)
- Whitley County, IN: 5.95 m/s, 19,334 kWh, payback 30 years (23 mi)
- Adams County, IN: 5.95 m/s, 19,334 kWh, payback 30 years (25 mi)
- Paulding County, OH: 5.88 m/s, 18,816 kWh, payback 28 years (26 mi)
- Wells County, IN: 5.95 m/s, 19,334 kWh, payback 30 years (26 mi)
- Huntington County, IN: 5.95 m/s, 19,334 kWh, payback 30 years (28 mi)
Sun versus wind in Allen County
Allen County gets 3.82 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,115 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,896. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.7 times. Panel output assumes an 80% system performance ratio. Wind or solar runs the same comparison for every county.
How this is worked out
Wind is NASA's Power climate record, the 2001-2025 average at 10 m and 50 m for the county's centre, carried to 30 m with this county's own measured wind shear and spread into hours with a Rayleigh distribution. The turbine is a generic 10 kW, 7 m rotor machine with 10% losses. Cost is $10,000 per kW installed with no tax credit, because the federal one ended in 2025. One county-centre number cannot see your hilltop or your tree line, so treat it as the starting point for a site survey, not a substitute. The full method and its weak spots are in how the numbers are made.