Wind Turbine Payback in Coos County, OR
Wind turbine payback in Coos 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 Coos County, OR averages 4.33 m/s (9.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 8,346 kWh a year, worth $1,290 at OR's 15.46¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 78 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Coos County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Coos County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.33 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,142 kWh a year here against the turbine's 835, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 60¢/kWh, 3.9 times what OR pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.33. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OR
Coos County is the 1,877th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in OR is Gilliam County at 5.48 m/s, payback 41 years.
Month by month in Coos County
December is the strongest month here, at 5.10 m/s and about 1,123 kWh. September is the weakest, 3.82 m/s and 469 kWh, so the best month makes 2.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 53% of the year's output in Coos County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.92 m/s | 1,018 kWh | $157 |
| February | 4.44 m/s | 688 kWh | $106 |
| March | 4.60 m/s | 843 kWh | $130 |
| April | 4.16 m/s | 609 kWh | $94 |
| May | 3.89 m/s | 512 kWh | $79 |
| June | 4.07 m/s | 571 kWh | $88 |
| July | 4.21 m/s | 653 kWh | $101 |
| August | 3.83 m/s | 488 kWh | $75 |
| September | 3.82 m/s | 469 kWh | $73 |
| October | 4.24 m/s | 665 kWh | $103 |
| November | 4.68 m/s | 860 kWh | $133 |
| December | 5.10 m/s | 1,123 kWh | $174 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Coos County averages 3.23 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.97 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.268, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 6,027 to 12,333 kWh a year, 105% 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 | 3.89 m/s | 6,027 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.33 m/s | 8,369 kWh | 77 years |
| 40 m | 4.68 m/s | 10,455 kWh | 62 years |
| 50 m | 4.97 m/s | 12,333 kWh | 52 years |
Counties around Coos County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Curry County, averages 4.71 m/s.
- Douglas County, OR: 2.81 m/s, 2,073 kWh, payback over 100 years (48 mi)
- Curry County, OR: 4.71 m/s, 10,635 kWh, payback 61 years (50 mi)
- Josephine County, OR: 2.84 m/s, 2,152 kWh, payback over 100 years (61 mi)
- Lane County, OR: 2.72 m/s, 1,846 kWh, payback over 100 years (79 mi)
- Jackson County, OR: 2.98 m/s, 2,542 kWh, payback over 100 years (90 mi)
- Benton County, OR: 3.42 m/s, 4,018 kWh, payback over 100 years (96 mi)
Sun versus wind in Coos County
Coos 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 835. 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.