Wind Turbine Payback in Broome County, NY
Wind turbine payback in Broome 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 Broome County, NY averages 3.7 m/s (8.3 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 5,164 kWh a year, worth $1,511 at NY's 29.26¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 66 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Broome County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Broome County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 5.6 m/s at the hub against 3.7 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,069 kWh a year here against the turbine's 516, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 97¢/kWh, 3.3 times what NY pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 5.6 m/s instead of 3.7. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NY
Broome County is the 2,288th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NY is Niagara County at 6.87 m/s, payback 13 years.
Month by month in Broome County
January is the strongest month here, at 4.55 m/s and about 821 kWh. August is the weakest, 2.84 m/s and 184 kWh, so the best month makes 4.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 62% of the year's output in Broome County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.55 m/s | 821 kWh | $240 |
| February | 4.71 m/s | 818 kWh | $239 |
| March | 4.44 m/s | 764 kWh | $224 |
| April | 4.06 m/s | 567 kWh | $166 |
| May | 3.41 m/s | 337 kWh | $99 |
| June | 3.07 m/s | 231 kWh | $68 |
| July | 2.88 m/s | 191 kWh | $56 |
| August | 2.84 m/s | 184 kWh | $54 |
| September | 3.08 m/s | 233 kWh | $68 |
| October | 3.47 m/s | 358 kWh | $105 |
| November | 3.78 m/s | 452 kWh | $132 |
| December | 4.18 m/s | 637 kWh | $186 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Broome County averages 2.31 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.61 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.429, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 2,943 to 10,008 kWh a year, 240% 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 | 3.11 m/s | 2,943 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.7 m/s | 5,177 kWh | 66 years |
| 40 m | 4.19 m/s | 7,565 kWh | 45 years |
| 50 m | 4.61 m/s | 10,008 kWh | 34 years |
Counties around Broome County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Cortland County, averages 3.88 m/s.
- Susquehanna County, PA: 3.7 m/s, 5,164 kWh, payback 92 years (24 mi)
- Tioga County, NY: 3.63 m/s, 4,862 kWh, payback 70 years (24 mi)
- Chenango County, NY: 3.84 m/s, 5,800 kWh, payback 59 years (25 mi)
- Cortland County, NY: 3.88 m/s, 5,989 kWh, payback 57 years (32 mi)
- Tompkins County, NY: 3.88 m/s, 5,989 kWh, payback 57 years (39 mi)
- Bradford County, PA: 3.63 m/s, 4,862 kWh, payback 97 years (43 mi)
Sun versus wind in Broome County
Broome County gets 3.66 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,069 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 516. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.1 times as much here as the turbine. 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.