Wind Turbine Payback in Beadle County, SD
Wind turbine payback in Beadle 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 Beadle County, SD averages 6.34 m/s (14.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 22,225 kWh a year, worth $3,240 at SD's 14.58¢/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 Beadle County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Beadle County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.1 m/s at the hub against 6.34 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,209 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,223, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 22¢/kWh, 1.5 times what SD pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.1 m/s instead of 6.34. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of SD
Beadle County is the 420th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in SD is Todd County at 6.77 m/s, payback 27 years.
Month by month in Beadle County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.97 m/s and about 2,208 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.62 m/s and 1,436 kWh, so the best month makes 1.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 41% of the year's output in Beadle County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.25 m/s | 1,830 kWh | $267 |
| February | 6.25 m/s | 1,653 kWh | $241 |
| March | 6.63 m/s | 2,071 kWh | $302 |
| April | 6.97 m/s | 2,208 kWh | $322 |
| May | 6.64 m/s | 2,077 kWh | $303 |
| June | 6.10 m/s | 1,683 kWh | $245 |
| July | 5.62 m/s | 1,436 kWh | $209 |
| August | 5.65 m/s | 1,453 kWh | $212 |
| September | 6.61 m/s | 1,988 kWh | $290 |
| October | 6.76 m/s | 2,149 kWh | $313 |
| November | 6.43 m/s | 1,880 kWh | $274 |
| December | 6.16 m/s | 1,773 kWh | $259 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Beadle County averages 5.01 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.07 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.214, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 18,308 to 27,542 kWh a year, 50% 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 | 5.81 m/s | 18,308 kWh | 38 years |
| 30 m | 6.34 m/s | 22,209 kWh | 31 years |
| 40 m | 6.74 m/s | 25,168 kWh | 27 years |
| 50 m | 7.07 m/s | 27,542 kWh | 25 years |
Counties around Beadle County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Clark County, averages 6.66 m/s.
- Sanborn County, SD: 6.36 m/s, 22,373 kWh, payback 31 years (29 mi)
- Jerauld County, SD: 6.38 m/s, 22,521 kWh, payback 31 years (30 mi)
- Spink County, SD: 6.32 m/s, 22,077 kWh, payback 31 years (35 mi)
- Hand County, SD: 6.35 m/s, 22,299 kWh, payback 31 years (37 mi)
- Kingsbury County, SD: 6.57 m/s, 23,922 kWh, payback 29 years (39 mi)
- Clark County, SD: 6.66 m/s, 24,582 kWh, payback 28 years (41 mi)
Sun versus wind in Beadle County
Beadle County gets 4.14 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,209 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,223. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.8 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.