Wind Turbine Payback in Crow Wing County, MN
Wind turbine payback in Crow Wing 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 Crow Wing County, MN averages 6.41 m/s (14.3 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 22,743 kWh a year, worth $3,739 at MN's 16.44¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 27 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Crow Wing County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Crow Wing County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.5 m/s at the hub against 6.41 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,101 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,274, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 22¢/kWh, 1.3 times what MN pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.5 m/s instead of 6.41. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MN
Crow Wing County is the 309th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MN is Lincoln County at 6.68 m/s, payback 25 years.
Month by month in Crow Wing County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.98 m/s and about 2,209 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.54 m/s and 1,390 kWh, so the best month makes 1.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 44% of the year's output in Crow Wing County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.62 m/s | 2,060 kWh | $339 |
| February | 6.71 m/s | 1,916 kWh | $315 |
| March | 6.64 m/s | 2,077 kWh | $341 |
| April | 6.98 m/s | 2,209 kWh | $363 |
| May | 6.56 m/s | 2,027 kWh | $333 |
| June | 6.03 m/s | 1,638 kWh | $269 |
| July | 5.54 m/s | 1,390 kWh | $229 |
| August | 5.68 m/s | 1,473 kWh | $242 |
| September | 6.53 m/s | 1,945 kWh | $320 |
| October | 6.78 m/s | 2,161 kWh | $355 |
| November | 6.59 m/s | 1,978 kWh | $325 |
| December | 6.33 m/s | 1,880 kWh | $309 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Crow Wing County averages 5.11 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.12 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.206, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 18,929 to 27,897 kWh a year, 47% 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 | 5.9 m/s | 18,929 kWh | 32 years |
| 30 m | 6.41 m/s | 22,734 kWh | 27 years |
| 40 m | 6.8 m/s | 25,603 kWh | 24 years |
| 50 m | 7.12 m/s | 27,897 kWh | 22 years |
Counties around Crow Wing County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Wadena County, averages 6.45 m/s.
- Aitkin County, MN: 6.32 m/s, 22,077 kWh, payback 28 years (32 mi)
- Morrison County, MN: 6.34 m/s, 22,225 kWh, payback 27 years (34 mi)
- Cass County, MN: 6.38 m/s, 22,521 kWh, payback 27 years (34 mi)
- Wadena County, MN: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 26 years (44 mi)
- Mille Lacs County, MN: 6.32 m/s, 22,077 kWh, payback 28 years (44 mi)
- Todd County, MN: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 26 years (49 mi)
Sun versus wind in Crow Wing County
Crow Wing County gets 3.77 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,101 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,274. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 2.1 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.