Wind Turbine Payback in Douglas County, WI
Wind turbine payback in Douglas 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 Douglas County, WI averages 5.45 m/s (12.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 15,677 kWh a year, worth $2,986 at WI's 19.05¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 34 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Douglas County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Douglas County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.9 m/s at the hub against 5.45 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,042 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,568, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 32¢/kWh, 1.7 times what WI pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.9 m/s instead of 5.45. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of WI
Douglas County is the 1,247th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in WI is Manitowoc County at 7.32 m/s, payback 18 years.
Month by month in Douglas County
January is the strongest month here, at 5.93 m/s and about 1,631 kWh. July is the weakest, 4.63 m/s and 863 kWh, so the best month makes 1.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 48% of the year's output in Douglas County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.93 m/s | 1,631 kWh | $311 |
| February | 6.08 m/s | 1,559 kWh | $297 |
| March | 5.73 m/s | 1,504 kWh | $287 |
| April | 5.80 m/s | 1,498 kWh | $285 |
| May | 5.21 m/s | 1,186 kWh | $226 |
| June | 4.89 m/s | 970 kWh | $185 |
| July | 4.63 m/s | 863 kWh | $164 |
| August | 4.77 m/s | 934 kWh | $178 |
| September | 5.42 m/s | 1,271 kWh | $242 |
| October | 5.66 m/s | 1,460 kWh | $278 |
| November | 5.72 m/s | 1,450 kWh | $276 |
| December | 5.65 m/s | 1,455 kWh | $277 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Douglas County averages 4.17 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.18 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.244, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 12,145 to 21,039 kWh a year, 73% 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 | 4.94 m/s | 12,145 kWh | 43 years |
| 30 m | 5.46 m/s | 15,719 kWh | 33 years |
| 40 m | 5.85 m/s | 18,613 kWh | 28 years |
| 50 m | 6.18 m/s | 21,039 kWh | 25 years |
Counties around Douglas County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Carlton County, averages 5.93 m/s.
- Bayfield County, WI: 4.9 m/s, 11,866 kWh, payback 44 years (36 mi)
- Carlton County, MN: 5.93 m/s, 19,186 kWh, payback 32 years (38 mi)
- Washburn County, WI: 5.62 m/s, 16,907 kWh, payback 31 years (40 mi)
- Burnett County, WI: 5.77 m/s, 18,006 kWh, payback 29 years (47 mi)
- Pine County, MN: 5.77 m/s, 18,006 kWh, payback 34 years (49 mi)
- Sawyer County, WI: 4.85 m/s, 11,537 kWh, payback 46 years (55 mi)
Sun versus wind in Douglas County
Douglas County gets 3.57 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,042 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,568. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.5 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.