Wind Turbine Payback in Cortland County, NY
Wind turbine payback in Cortland 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 Cortland County, NY averages 3.88 m/s (8.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 5,989 kWh a year, worth $1,753 at NY's 29.26¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 57 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Cortland County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Cortland County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 5.6 m/s at the hub against 3.88 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,057 kWh a year here against the turbine's 599, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 83¢/kWh, 2.9 times what NY pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 5.6 m/s instead of 3.88. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NY
Cortland County is the 2,149th 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 Cortland County
January is the strongest month here, at 4.80 m/s and about 952 kWh. August is the weakest, 2.99 m/s and 219 kWh, so the best month makes 4.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 62% of the year's output in Cortland County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.80 m/s | 952 kWh | $279 |
| February | 4.92 m/s | 921 kWh | $269 |
| March | 4.60 m/s | 847 kWh | $248 |
| April | 4.21 m/s | 633 kWh | $185 |
| May | 3.56 m/s | 386 kWh | $113 |
| June | 3.24 m/s | 276 kWh | $81 |
| July | 3.04 m/s | 232 kWh | $68 |
| August | 2.99 m/s | 219 kWh | $64 |
| September | 3.23 m/s | 274 kWh | $80 |
| October | 3.64 m/s | 415 kWh | $121 |
| November | 3.99 m/s | 538 kWh | $157 |
| December | 4.37 m/s | 728 kWh | $213 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Cortland County averages 2.49 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.77 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.404, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 3,556 to 11,018 kWh a year, 210% 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 | 3.29 m/s | 3,556 kWh | 96 years |
| 30 m | 3.88 m/s | 5,992 kWh | 57 years |
| 40 m | 4.36 m/s | 8,510 kWh | 40 years |
| 50 m | 4.77 m/s | 11,018 kWh | 31 years |
Counties around Cortland County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Onondaga County, averages 3.95 m/s.
- Tompkins County, NY: 3.88 m/s, 5,989 kWh, payback 57 years (22 mi)
- Chenango County, NY: 3.84 m/s, 5,800 kWh, payback 59 years (25 mi)
- Onondaga County, NY: 3.95 m/s, 6,329 kWh, payback 54 years (29 mi)
- Madison County, NY: 3.88 m/s, 5,989 kWh, payback 57 years (30 mi)
- Tioga County, NY: 3.63 m/s, 4,862 kWh, payback 70 years (31 mi)
- Broome County, NY: 3.7 m/s, 5,164 kWh, payback 66 years (32 mi)
Sun versus wind in Cortland County
Cortland County gets 3.62 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,057 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 599. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.8 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.