Wind Turbine Payback in Delta County, MI
Wind turbine payback in Delta 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 Delta County, MI averages 4.35 m/s (9.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 8,460 kWh a year, worth $1,838 at MI's 21.73¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 54 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Delta County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Delta County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.4 m/s at the hub against 4.35 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,060 kWh a year here against the turbine's 846, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 59¢/kWh, 2.7 times what MI pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.4 m/s instead of 4.35. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MI
Delta County is the 1,852nd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MI is Keweenaw County at 7.4 m/s, payback 15 years.
Month by month in Delta County
January is the strongest month here, at 5.02 m/s and about 1,076 kWh. June is the weakest, 3.49 m/s and 352 kWh, so the best month makes 3.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 55% of the year's output in Delta County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.02 m/s | 1,076 kWh | $234 |
| February | 5.18 m/s | 1,056 kWh | $229 |
| March | 4.81 m/s | 957 kWh | $208 |
| April | 4.66 m/s | 847 kWh | $184 |
| May | 3.97 m/s | 545 kWh | $118 |
| June | 3.49 m/s | 352 kWh | $76 |
| July | 3.51 m/s | 372 kWh | $81 |
| August | 3.66 m/s | 425 kWh | $92 |
| September | 4.14 m/s | 598 kWh | $130 |
| October | 4.45 m/s | 767 kWh | $167 |
| November | 4.66 m/s | 847 kWh | $184 |
| December | 4.75 m/s | 925 kWh | $201 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Delta County averages 3.01 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.17 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.336, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 5,614 to 13,698 kWh a year, 144% 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 | 3.8 m/s | 5,614 kWh | 82 years |
| 30 m | 4.35 m/s | 8,486 kWh | 54 years |
| 40 m | 4.8 m/s | 11,189 kWh | 41 years |
| 50 m | 5.17 m/s | 13,698 kWh | 34 years |
Counties around Delta County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Leelanau County, averages 7.3 m/s.
- Menominee County, MI: 4.99 m/s, 12,467 kWh, payback 37 years (34 mi)
- Schoolcraft County, MI: 5.88 m/s, 18,816 kWh, payback 25 years (37 mi)
- Dickinson County, MI: 3.95 m/s, 6,329 kWh, payback 73 years (49 mi)
- Door County, WI: 7.26 m/s, 28,881 kWh, payback 18 years (50 mi)
- Alger County, MI: 5.37 m/s, 15,105 kWh, payback 31 years (51 mi)
- Leelanau County, MI: 7.3 m/s, 29,160 kWh, payback 16 years (61 mi)
Sun versus wind in Delta County
Delta County gets 3.63 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,060 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 846. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.3 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.