Wind Turbine Payback in Clark County, OH
Wind turbine payback in Clark 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 Clark County, OH averages 5.76 m/s (12.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 17,932 kWh a year, worth $3,373 at OH's 18.81¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 30 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Clark County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Clark County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.9 m/s at the hub against 5.76 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,165 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,793, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 28¢/kWh, 1.5 times what OH pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.9 m/s instead of 5.76. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OH
Clark County is the 1,103rd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in OH is Lake County at 6.53 m/s, payback 23 years.
Month by month in Clark County
January is the strongest month here, at 6.72 m/s and about 2,127 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.26 m/s and 677 kWh, so the best month makes 3.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 54% of the year's output in Clark County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.72 m/s | 2,127 kWh | $400 |
| February | 6.58 m/s | 1,842 kWh | $346 |
| March | 6.51 m/s | 1,995 kWh | $375 |
| April | 6.66 m/s | 2,022 kWh | $380 |
| May | 5.60 m/s | 1,427 kWh | $268 |
| June | 4.99 m/s | 1,026 kWh | $193 |
| July | 4.28 m/s | 686 kWh | $129 |
| August | 4.26 m/s | 677 kWh | $127 |
| September | 4.81 m/s | 924 kWh | $174 |
| October | 5.90 m/s | 1,609 kWh | $303 |
| November | 6.36 m/s | 1,839 kWh | $346 |
| December | 6.42 m/s | 1,939 kWh | $365 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Clark County averages 4.46 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.48 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.232, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 14,180 to 23,260 kWh a year, 64% 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 | 5.24 m/s | 14,180 kWh | 38 years |
| 30 m | 5.76 m/s | 17,901 kWh | 30 years |
| 40 m | 6.15 m/s | 20,839 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 6.48 m/s | 23,260 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Clark County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Miami County, averages 5.77 m/s.
- Champaign County, OH: 5.76 m/s, 17,932 kWh, payback 30 years (15 mi)
- Greene County, OH: 5.48 m/s, 15,893 kWh, payback 34 years (17 mi)
- Madison County, OH: 5.54 m/s, 16,326 kWh, payback 33 years (20 mi)
- Miami County, OH: 5.77 m/s, 18,006 kWh, payback 30 years (25 mi)
- Montgomery County, OH: 5.77 m/s, 18,006 kWh, payback 30 years (29 mi)
- Fayette County, OH: 5.48 m/s, 15,893 kWh, payback 34 years (30 mi)
Sun versus wind in Clark County
Clark County gets 3.99 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,165 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,793. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.5 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.