Wind Turbine Payback in Carbon County, PA
Wind turbine payback in Carbon 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 Carbon County, PA averages 3.61 m/s (8.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 4,778 kWh a year, worth $1,010 at PA's 21.13¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 99 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Carbon County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Carbon County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.5 m/s at the hub against 3.61 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,127 kWh a year here against the turbine's 478, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 105¢/kWh, 5.0 times what PA pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.5 m/s instead of 3.61. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of PA
Carbon County is the 2,382nd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in PA is Philadelphia County at 4.74 m/s, payback 44 years.
Month by month in Carbon County
March is the strongest month here, at 4.36 m/s and about 722 kWh. August is the weakest, 2.74 m/s and 162 kWh, so the best month makes 4.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 61% of the year's output in Carbon County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.31 m/s | 699 kWh | $148 |
| February | 4.48 m/s | 705 kWh | $149 |
| March | 4.36 m/s | 722 kWh | $153 |
| April | 4.02 m/s | 549 kWh | $116 |
| May | 3.34 m/s | 317 kWh | $67 |
| June | 3.03 m/s | 222 kWh | $47 |
| July | 2.82 m/s | 177 kWh | $37 |
| August | 2.74 m/s | 162 kWh | $34 |
| September | 3.04 m/s | 224 kWh | $47 |
| October | 3.49 m/s | 363 kWh | $77 |
| November | 3.74 m/s | 440 kWh | $93 |
| December | 4.01 m/s | 564 kWh | $119 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Carbon County averages 2.22 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.52 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.442, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 2,645 to 9,459 kWh a year, 258% 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 | 3.01 m/s | 2,645 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.61 m/s | 4,763 kWh | 99 years |
| 40 m | 4.1 m/s | 7,067 kWh | 67 years |
| 50 m | 4.52 m/s | 9,459 kWh | 50 years |
Counties around Carbon County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Lackawanna County, averages 3.71 m/s.
- Monroe County, PA: 3.61 m/s, 4,778 kWh, payback 99 years (22 mi)
- Lehigh County, PA: 3.62 m/s, 4,820 kWh, payback 98 years (22 mi)
- Luzerne County, PA: 3.48 m/s, 4,250 kWh, payback over 100 years (23 mi)
- Northampton County, PA: 3.55 m/s, 4,530 kWh, payback over 100 years (24 mi)
- Schuylkill County, PA: 3.6 m/s, 4,736 kWh, payback 100 years (31 mi)
- Lackawanna County, PA: 3.71 m/s, 5,209 kWh, payback 91 years (36 mi)
Sun versus wind in Carbon County
Carbon County gets 3.86 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,127 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 478. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.4 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.