Wind Turbine Payback in Clinton County, NY
Wind turbine payback in Clinton 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 Clinton County, NY averages 4.11 m/s (9.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 7,143 kWh a year, worth $2,090 at NY's 29.26¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 48 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Clinton County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Clinton County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 5.6 m/s at the hub against 4.11 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,031 kWh a year here against the turbine's 714, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 70¢/kWh, 2.4 times what NY pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 5.6 m/s instead of 4.11. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NY
Clinton County is the 1,990th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NY is Niagara County at 6.87 m/s, payback 13 years.
Month by month in Clinton County
February is the strongest month here, at 5.07 m/s and about 997 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.34 m/s and 317 kWh, so the best month makes 3.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 58% of the year's output in Clinton County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.77 m/s | 937 kWh | $274 |
| February | 5.07 m/s | 997 kWh | $292 |
| March | 4.87 m/s | 992 kWh | $290 |
| April | 4.53 m/s | 781 kWh | $229 |
| May | 3.86 m/s | 501 kWh | $147 |
| June | 3.48 m/s | 350 kWh | $102 |
| July | 3.39 m/s | 332 kWh | $97 |
| August | 3.34 m/s | 317 kWh | $93 |
| September | 3.52 m/s | 361 kWh | $106 |
| October | 3.90 m/s | 518 kWh | $152 |
| November | 4.18 m/s | 618 kWh | $181 |
| December | 4.38 m/s | 732 kWh | $214 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Clinton County averages 2.69 m/s; at 50 m it is 5 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.385, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 4,383 to 12,535 kWh a year, 186% 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 | 3.51 m/s | 4,383 kWh | 78 years |
| 30 m | 4.11 m/s | 7,128 kWh | 48 years |
| 40 m | 4.59 m/s | 9,875 kWh | 35 years |
| 50 m | 5 m/s | 12,535 kWh | 27 years |
Counties around Clinton County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Clinton County.
- Grand Isle County, VT: 3.97 m/s, 6,428 kWh, payback 65 years (20 mi)
- Franklin County, NY: 3.96 m/s, 6,378 kWh, payback 54 years (32 mi)
- Chittenden County, VT: 3.82 m/s, 5,707 kWh, payback 73 years (37 mi)
- Franklin County, VT: 3.97 m/s, 6,428 kWh, payback 65 years (40 mi)
- Essex County, NY: 3.61 m/s, 4,778 kWh, payback 72 years (45 mi)
- Lamoille County, VT: 3.55 m/s, 4,530 kWh, payback 92 years (54 mi)
Sun versus wind in Clinton County
Clinton County gets 3.53 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,031 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 714. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.4 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.