Wind Turbine Payback in Cuming County, NE
Wind turbine payback in Cuming 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 Cuming County, NE averages 6.54 m/s (14.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 23,702 kWh a year, worth $3,062 at NE's 12.92¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 33 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Cuming County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Cuming County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.8 m/s at the hub against 6.54 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,223 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,370, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 21¢/kWh, 1.6 times what NE pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.8 m/s instead of 6.54. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NE
Cuming County is the 158th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NE is Cherry County at 6.83 m/s, payback 30 years.
Month by month in Cuming County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.33 m/s and about 2,416 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.36 m/s and 1,279 kWh, so the best month makes 1.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 46% of the year's output in Cuming County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.88 m/s | 2,222 kWh | $287 |
| February | 6.84 m/s | 1,987 kWh | $257 |
| March | 6.99 m/s | 2,288 kWh | $296 |
| April | 7.33 m/s | 2,416 kWh | $312 |
| May | 6.70 m/s | 2,112 kWh | $273 |
| June | 6.13 m/s | 1,696 kWh | $219 |
| July | 5.36 m/s | 1,279 kWh | $165 |
| August | 5.36 m/s | 1,279 kWh | $165 |
| September | 6.49 m/s | 1,919 kWh | $248 |
| October | 6.81 m/s | 2,178 kWh | $281 |
| November | 6.92 m/s | 2,177 kWh | $281 |
| December | 6.73 m/s | 2,134 kWh | $276 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Cuming County averages 5.16 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.3 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.216, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 19,624 to 29,160 kWh a year, 49% 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 | 5.99 m/s | 19,624 kWh | 39 years |
| 30 m | 6.54 m/s | 23,682 kWh | 33 years |
| 40 m | 6.96 m/s | 26,731 kWh | 29 years |
| 50 m | 7.3 m/s | 29,160 kWh | 27 years |
Counties around Cuming County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Cuming County.
- Stanton County, NE: 6.54 m/s, 23,702 kWh, payback 33 years (20 mi)
- Thurston County, NE: 6.39 m/s, 22,595 kWh, payback 34 years (21 mi)
- Burt County, NE: 6.39 m/s, 22,595 kWh, payback 34 years (24 mi)
- Dodge County, NE: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 34 years (25 mi)
- Wayne County, NE: 6.54 m/s, 23,702 kWh, payback 33 years (27 mi)
- Colfax County, NE: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 34 years (28 mi)
Sun versus wind in Cuming County
Cuming County gets 4.19 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,223 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,370. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.9 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.