Wind Turbine Payback in Butte County, ID
Wind turbine payback in Butte 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 Butte County, ID averages 4.32 m/s (9.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 8,289 kWh a year, worth $1,079 at ID's 13.02¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 93 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Butte County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Butte County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.7 m/s at the hub against 4.32 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,329 kWh a year here against the turbine's 829, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 60¢/kWh, 4.6 times what ID pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.7 m/s instead of 4.32. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of ID
Butte County is the 1,882nd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in ID is Owyhee County at 5.38 m/s, payback 51 years.
Month by month in Butte County
March is the strongest month here, at 4.71 m/s and about 905 kWh. January is the weakest, 3.69 m/s and 433 kWh, so the best month makes 2.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 36% of the year's output in Butte County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.69 m/s | 433 kWh | $56 |
| February | 4.28 m/s | 619 kWh | $81 |
| March | 4.71 m/s | 905 kWh | $118 |
| April | 4.73 m/s | 885 kWh | $115 |
| May | 4.58 m/s | 833 kWh | $108 |
| June | 4.71 m/s | 875 kWh | $114 |
| July | 4.49 m/s | 787 kWh | $102 |
| August | 4.34 m/s | 715 kWh | $93 |
| September | 4.18 m/s | 618 kWh | $80 |
| October | 4.18 m/s | 639 kWh | $83 |
| November | 4.02 m/s | 548 kWh | $71 |
| December | 3.93 m/s | 529 kWh | $69 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Butte County averages 3.45 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.79 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.204, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 6,444 to 11,147 kWh a year, 73% 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 | 3.97 m/s | 6,444 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.32 m/s | 8,266 kWh | 93 years |
| 40 m | 4.58 m/s | 9,804 kWh | 78 years |
| 50 m | 4.79 m/s | 11,147 kWh | 69 years |
Counties around Butte County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Minidoka County, averages 4.93 m/s.
- Jefferson County, ID: 3.91 m/s, 6,134 kWh, payback over 100 years (44 mi)
- Blaine County, ID: 4.2 m/s, 7,623 kWh, payback over 100 years (44 mi)
- Bingham County, ID: 4.82 m/s, 11,341 kWh, payback 68 years (51 mi)
- Clark County, ID: 3.94 m/s, 6,280 kWh, payback over 100 years (58 mi)
- Minidoka County, ID: 4.93 m/s, 12,065 kWh, payback 64 years (62 mi)
- Custer County, ID: 3.3 m/s, 3,577 kWh, payback over 100 years (67 mi)
Sun versus wind in Butte County
Butte County gets 4.55 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,329 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 829. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.6 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.