Wind Turbine Payback in Fillmore County, MN
Wind turbine payback in Fillmore 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 Fillmore County, MN averages 6.22 m/s (13.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,336 kWh a year, worth $3,508 at MN's 16.44¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 29 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Fillmore County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Fillmore County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.5 m/s at the hub against 6.22 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,142 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,134, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 23¢/kWh, 1.4 times what MN pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.5 m/s instead of 6.22. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MN
Fillmore County is the 566th 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 Fillmore County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.97 m/s and about 2,202 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.96 m/s and 1,043 kWh, so the best month makes 2.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 48% of the year's output in Fillmore County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.81 m/s | 2,183 kWh | $359 |
| February | 6.85 m/s | 1,991 kWh | $327 |
| March | 6.71 m/s | 2,116 kWh | $348 |
| April | 6.97 m/s | 2,202 kWh | $362 |
| May | 6.28 m/s | 1,848 kWh | $304 |
| June | 5.65 m/s | 1,408 kWh | $231 |
| July | 5.03 m/s | 1,079 kWh | $177 |
| August | 4.96 m/s | 1,043 kWh | $171 |
| September | 5.96 m/s | 1,592 kWh | $262 |
| October | 6.49 m/s | 1,983 kWh | $326 |
| November | 6.59 m/s | 1,978 kWh | $325 |
| December | 6.43 m/s | 1,944 kWh | $320 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Fillmore County averages 4.89 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.96 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.219, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 17,452 to 26,756 kWh a year, 53% 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 | 5.69 m/s | 17,452 kWh | 35 years |
| 30 m | 6.22 m/s | 21,361 kWh | 29 years |
| 40 m | 6.63 m/s | 24,348 kWh | 25 years |
| 50 m | 6.96 m/s | 26,756 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Fillmore County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Howard County, averages 6.37 m/s.
- Howard County, IA: 6.37 m/s, 22,447 kWh, payback 31 years (25 mi)
- Winona County, MN: 6.17 m/s, 20,965 kWh, payback 29 years (26 mi)
- Olmsted County, MN: 6.37 m/s, 22,447 kWh, payback 27 years (27 mi)
- Winneshiek County, IA: 6.22 m/s, 21,336 kWh, payback 32 years (29 mi)
- Houston County, MN: 6.09 m/s, 20,371 kWh, payback 30 years (30 mi)
- Mower County, MN: 6.37 m/s, 22,447 kWh, payback 27 years (33 mi)
Sun versus wind in Fillmore County
Fillmore County gets 3.91 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,142 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,134. 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.