Wind Turbine Payback in Dickinson County, MI
Wind turbine payback in Dickinson 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 Dickinson County, MI averages 3.95 m/s (8.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 6,329 kWh a year, worth $1,375 at MI's 21.73¢/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 Dickinson County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Dickinson County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.4 m/s at the hub against 3.95 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,004 kWh a year here against the turbine's 633, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 79¢/kWh, 3.6 times what MI pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.4 m/s instead of 3.95. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MI
Dickinson County is the 2,089th 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 Dickinson County
February is the strongest month here, at 4.75 m/s and about 837 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.30 m/s and 304 kWh, so the best month makes 2.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 55% of the year's output in Dickinson County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.53 m/s | 810 kWh | $176 |
| February | 4.75 m/s | 837 kWh | $182 |
| March | 4.41 m/s | 748 kWh | $163 |
| April | 4.30 m/s | 674 kWh | $146 |
| May | 3.71 m/s | 442 kWh | $96 |
| June | 3.35 m/s | 309 kWh | $67 |
| July | 3.30 m/s | 304 kWh | $66 |
| August | 3.35 m/s | 319 kWh | $69 |
| September | 3.68 m/s | 416 kWh | $90 |
| October | 3.91 m/s | 522 kWh | $113 |
| November | 4.05 m/s | 562 kWh | $122 |
| December | 4.18 m/s | 639 kWh | $139 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Dickinson County averages 2.56 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.84 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.396, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 3,820 to 11,472 kWh a year, 200% 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 | 3.37 m/s | 3,820 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.95 m/s | 6,346 kWh | 73 years |
| 40 m | 4.43 m/s | 8,927 kWh | 52 years |
| 50 m | 4.84 m/s | 11,472 kWh | 40 years |
Counties around Dickinson County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Menominee County, averages 4.99 m/s.
- Florence County, WI: 3.95 m/s, 6,329 kWh, payback 83 years (28 mi)
- Iron County, MI: 4.06 m/s, 6,883 kWh, payback 67 years (34 mi)
- Menominee County, MI: 4.99 m/s, 12,467 kWh, payback 37 years (37 mi)
- Marinette County, WI: 4.71 m/s, 10,635 kWh, payback 49 years (46 mi)
- Marquette County, MI: 4.81 m/s, 11,276 kWh, payback 41 years (46 mi)
- Delta County, MI: 4.35 m/s, 8,460 kWh, payback 54 years (49 mi)
Sun versus wind in Dickinson County
Dickinson County gets 3.44 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,004 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 633. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.6 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.