Wind Turbine Payback in Coshocton County, OH
Wind turbine payback in Coshocton 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 Coshocton County, OH averages 4.14 m/s (9.3 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 7,301 kWh a year, worth $1,373 at OH's 18.81¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 73 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Coshocton County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Coshocton County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.9 m/s at the hub against 4.14 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,110 kWh a year here against the turbine's 730, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 68¢/kWh, 3.6 times what OH pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.9 m/s instead of 4.14. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OH
Coshocton County is the 1,975th 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 Coshocton County
January is the strongest month here, at 4.92 m/s and about 1,020 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.14 m/s and 259 kWh, so the best month makes 3.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 57% of the year's output in Coshocton County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.92 m/s | 1,020 kWh | $192 |
| February | 4.91 m/s | 917 kWh | $172 |
| March | 4.78 m/s | 941 kWh | $177 |
| April | 4.75 m/s | 893 kWh | $168 |
| May | 3.92 m/s | 525 kWh | $99 |
| June | 3.56 m/s | 376 kWh | $71 |
| July | 3.17 m/s | 266 kWh | $50 |
| August | 3.14 m/s | 259 kWh | $49 |
| September | 3.45 m/s | 341 kWh | $64 |
| October | 4.13 m/s | 615 kWh | $116 |
| November | 4.41 m/s | 725 kWh | $136 |
| December | 4.53 m/s | 808 kWh | $152 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Coshocton County averages 2.8 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.96 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.355, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 4,664 to 12,266 kWh a year, 163% 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 | 3.58 m/s | 4,664 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.14 m/s | 7,287 kWh | 73 years |
| 40 m | 4.58 m/s | 9,838 kWh | 54 years |
| 50 m | 4.96 m/s | 12,266 kWh | 43 years |
Counties around Coshocton County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Knox County, averages 4.84 m/s.
- Holmes County, OH: 4.14 m/s, 7,301 kWh, payback 73 years (19 mi)
- Muskingum County, OH: 3.37 m/s, 3,830 kWh, payback over 100 years (23 mi)
- Tuscarawas County, OH: 3.67 m/s, 5,034 kWh, payback over 100 years (26 mi)
- Knox County, OH: 4.84 m/s, 11,472 kWh, payback 46 years (27 mi)
- Guernsey County, OH: 3.38 m/s, 3,868 kWh, payback over 100 years (28 mi)
- Licking County, OH: 4.33 m/s, 8,346 kWh, payback 64 years (32 mi)
Sun versus wind in Coshocton County
Coshocton County gets 3.8 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,110 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 730. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.5 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.