Wind Turbine Payback in Burnett County, WI
Wind turbine payback in Burnett 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 Burnett County, WI averages 5.77 m/s (12.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 18,006 kWh a year, worth $3,430 at WI's 19.05¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 29 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Burnett County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Burnett County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.9 m/s at the hub against 5.77 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,110 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,801, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 28¢/kWh, 1.5 times what WI pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.9 m/s instead of 5.77. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of WI
Burnett County is the 1,088th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in WI is Manitowoc County at 7.32 m/s, payback 18 years.
Month by month in Burnett County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.27 m/s and about 1,784 kWh. July is the weakest, 4.92 m/s and 1,021 kWh, so the best month makes 1.7 times the worst. November to March brings in 45% of the year's output in Burnett County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.03 m/s | 1,693 kWh | $323 |
| February | 6.23 m/s | 1,645 kWh | $313 |
| March | 6.05 m/s | 1,704 kWh | $325 |
| April | 6.27 m/s | 1,784 kWh | $340 |
| May | 5.81 m/s | 1,554 kWh | $296 |
| June | 5.38 m/s | 1,244 kWh | $237 |
| July | 4.92 m/s | 1,021 kWh | $195 |
| August | 5.07 m/s | 1,102 kWh | $210 |
| September | 5.80 m/s | 1,498 kWh | $285 |
| October | 6.03 m/s | 1,693 kWh | $323 |
| November | 5.92 m/s | 1,573 kWh | $300 |
| December | 5.73 m/s | 1,504 kWh | $287 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Burnett County averages 4.44 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.51 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.238, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 14,147 to 23,481 kWh a year, 66% 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 | 5.23 m/s | 14,147 kWh | 37 years |
| 30 m | 5.76 m/s | 17,967 kWh | 29 years |
| 40 m | 6.17 m/s | 20,989 kWh | 25 years |
| 50 m | 6.51 m/s | 23,481 kWh | 22 years |
Counties around Burnett County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Kanabec County, averages 6.14 m/s.
- Pine County, MN: 5.77 m/s, 18,006 kWh, payback 34 years (25 mi)
- Washburn County, WI: 5.62 m/s, 16,907 kWh, payback 31 years (28 mi)
- Polk County, WI: 6.08 m/s, 20,297 kWh, payback 26 years (28 mi)
- Chisago County, MN: 5.96 m/s, 19,408 kWh, payback 31 years (36 mi)
- Barron County, WI: 6.03 m/s, 19,926 kWh, payback 26 years (39 mi)
- Kanabec County, MN: 6.14 m/s, 20,742 kWh, payback 29 years (45 mi)
Sun versus wind in Burnett County
Burnett County gets 3.8 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,110 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,801. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.6 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.