Wind Turbine Payback in Ford County, IL
Wind turbine payback in Ford 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 Ford County, IL averages 6.07 m/s (13.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 20,223 kWh a year, worth $3,889 at IL's 19.23¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 26 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Ford County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Ford County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.8 m/s at the hub against 6.07 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,174 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,022, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 25¢/kWh, 1.3 times what IL pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.8 m/s instead of 6.07. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of IL
Ford County is the 717th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in IL is Cook County at 6.73 m/s, payback 21 years.
Month by month in Ford County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.09 m/s and about 2,275 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.56 m/s and 824 kWh, so the best month makes 2.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 51% of the year's output in Ford County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.78 m/s | 2,160 kWh | $415 |
| February | 6.70 m/s | 1,906 kWh | $367 |
| March | 6.74 m/s | 2,138 kWh | $411 |
| April | 7.09 m/s | 2,275 kWh | $437 |
| May | 6.17 m/s | 1,781 kWh | $342 |
| June | 5.30 m/s | 1,200 kWh | $231 |
| July | 4.57 m/s | 828 kWh | $159 |
| August | 4.56 m/s | 824 kWh | $158 |
| September | 5.24 m/s | 1,164 kWh | $224 |
| October | 6.34 m/s | 1,888 kWh | $363 |
| November | 6.81 m/s | 2,112 kWh | $406 |
| December | 6.62 m/s | 2,061 kWh | $396 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Ford County averages 4.73 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.82 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.227, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 16,321 to 25,747 kWh a year, 58% 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 | 5.54 m/s | 16,321 kWh | 32 years |
| 30 m | 6.07 m/s | 20,247 kWh | 26 years |
| 40 m | 6.48 m/s | 23,283 kWh | 22 years |
| 50 m | 6.82 m/s | 25,747 kWh | 20 years |
Counties around Ford County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, McLean County, averages 6.13 m/s.
- Iroquois County, IL: 6.07 m/s, 20,223 kWh, payback 26 years (23 mi)
- Livingston County, IL: 6.04 m/s, 20,001 kWh, payback 26 years (27 mi)
- Champaign County, IL: 6 m/s, 19,704 kWh, payback 26 years (32 mi)
- McLean County, IL: 6.13 m/s, 20,668 kWh, payback 25 years (33 mi)
- Vermilion County, IL: 5.9 m/s, 18,964 kWh, payback 27 years (39 mi)
- Kankakee County, IL: 6.02 m/s, 19,852 kWh, payback 26 years (42 mi)
Sun versus wind in Ford County
Ford County gets 4.02 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,174 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,022. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.7 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.