Wind Turbine Payback in Chickasaw County, IA
Wind turbine payback in Chickasaw 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 Chickasaw County, IA averages 6.21 m/s (13.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,262 kWh a year, worth $3,094 at IA's 14.55¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 32 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Chickasaw County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Chickasaw County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.1 m/s at the hub against 6.21 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,142 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,126, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 24¢/kWh, 1.6 times what IA pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.1 m/s instead of 6.21. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of IA
Chickasaw County is the 576th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in IA is Dickinson County at 6.59 m/s, payback 29 years.
Month by month in Chickasaw County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.13 m/s and about 2,301 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.87 m/s and 994 kWh, so the best month makes 2.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 47% of the year's output in Chickasaw County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.65 m/s | 2,082 kWh | $303 |
| February | 6.69 m/s | 1,901 kWh | $277 |
| March | 6.78 m/s | 2,160 kWh | $314 |
| April | 7.13 m/s | 2,301 kWh | $335 |
| May | 6.44 m/s | 1,949 kWh | $284 |
| June | 5.67 m/s | 1,419 kWh | $206 |
| July | 4.91 m/s | 1,014 kWh | $148 |
| August | 4.87 m/s | 994 kWh | $145 |
| September | 5.91 m/s | 1,565 kWh | $228 |
| October | 6.48 m/s | 1,977 kWh | $288 |
| November | 6.60 m/s | 1,983 kWh | $289 |
| December | 6.43 m/s | 1,943 kWh | $283 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Chickasaw County averages 4.87 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.96 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.222, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 17,338 to 26,756 kWh a year, 54% 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 | 5.68 m/s | 17,338 kWh | 40 years |
| 30 m | 6.21 m/s | 21,290 kWh | 32 years |
| 40 m | 6.62 m/s | 24,316 kWh | 28 years |
| 50 m | 6.96 m/s | 26,756 kWh | 26 years |
Counties around Chickasaw County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Howard County, averages 6.37 m/s.
- Bremer County, IA: 6.21 m/s, 21,262 kWh, payback 32 years (19 mi)
- Howard County, IA: 6.37 m/s, 22,447 kWh, payback 31 years (21 mi)
- Floyd County, IA: 6.21 m/s, 21,262 kWh, payback 32 years (24 mi)
- Fayette County, IA: 6.18 m/s, 21,039 kWh, payback 33 years (28 mi)
- Winneshiek County, IA: 6.22 m/s, 21,336 kWh, payback 32 years (28 mi)
- Mitchell County, IA: 6.37 m/s, 22,447 kWh, payback 31 years (31 mi)
Sun versus wind in Chickasaw County
Chickasaw County gets 3.91 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,142 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,126. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.9 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.