Wind Turbine Payback in Gooding County, ID
Wind turbine payback in Gooding 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 Gooding County, ID averages 4.99 m/s (11.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 12,467 kWh a year, worth $1,623 at ID's 13.02¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 62 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Gooding County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Gooding County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.7 m/s at the hub against 4.99 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,352 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,247, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 40¢/kWh, 3.1 times what ID pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.7 m/s instead of 4.99. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of ID
Gooding County is the 1,457th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in ID is Owyhee County at 5.38 m/s, payback 51 years.
Month by month in Gooding County
January is the strongest month here, at 5.24 m/s and about 1,205 kWh. September is the weakest, 4.58 m/s and 808 kWh, so the best month makes 1.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 45% of the year's output in Gooding County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.24 m/s | 1,205 kWh | $157 |
| February | 5.14 m/s | 1,036 kWh | $135 |
| March | 5.19 m/s | 1,173 kWh | $153 |
| April | 5.23 m/s | 1,161 kWh | $151 |
| May | 4.97 m/s | 1,049 kWh | $137 |
| June | 5.10 m/s | 1,085 kWh | $141 |
| July | 4.79 m/s | 945 kWh | $123 |
| August | 4.61 m/s | 849 kWh | $111 |
| September | 4.58 m/s | 808 kWh | $105 |
| October | 4.84 m/s | 974 kWh | $127 |
| November | 5.13 m/s | 1,105 kWh | $144 |
| December | 5.05 m/s | 1,095 kWh | $143 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Gooding County averages 3.88 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.61 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.229, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 9,629 to 16,834 kWh a year, 75% 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 | 4.55 m/s | 9,629 kWh | 80 years |
| 30 m | 4.99 m/s | 12,472 kWh | 62 years |
| 40 m | 5.33 m/s | 14,824 kWh | 52 years |
| 50 m | 5.61 m/s | 16,834 kWh | 46 years |
Counties around Gooding County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Jerome County, averages 5.3 m/s.
- Lincoln County, ID: 4.97 m/s, 12,333 kWh, payback 62 years (34 mi)
- Jerome County, ID: 5.3 m/s, 14,608 kWh, payback 53 years (34 mi)
- Camas County, ID: 4.1 m/s, 7,090 kWh, payback over 100 years (37 mi)
- Twin Falls County, ID: 5.3 m/s, 14,608 kWh, payback 53 years (44 mi)
- Elmore County, ID: 3.85 m/s, 5,847 kWh, payback over 100 years (44 mi)
- Blaine County, ID: 4.2 m/s, 7,623 kWh, payback over 100 years (52 mi)
Sun versus wind in Gooding County
Gooding County gets 4.63 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,352 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,247. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.1 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.