Wind Turbine Payback in Griggs County, ND
Wind turbine payback in Griggs 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 Griggs County, ND averages 6.5 m/s (14.5 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 23,407 kWh a year, worth $2,917 at ND's 12.46¢/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 Griggs County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Griggs County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 9.1 m/s at the hub against 6.5 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,145 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,341, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 21¢/kWh, 1.7 times what ND pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 9.1 m/s instead of 6.5. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of ND
Griggs County is the 208th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in ND is Bowman County at 6.79 m/s, payback 31 years.
Month by month in Griggs County
October is the strongest month here, at 7.10 m/s and about 2,355 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.63 m/s and 1,441 kWh, so the best month makes 1.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 43% of the year's output in Griggs County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.62 m/s | 2,062 kWh | $257 |
| February | 6.48 m/s | 1,787 kWh | $223 |
| March | 6.72 m/s | 2,124 kWh | $265 |
| April | 6.93 m/s | 2,184 kWh | $272 |
| May | 6.81 m/s | 2,180 kWh | $272 |
| June | 6.19 m/s | 1,733 kWh | $216 |
| July | 5.63 m/s | 1,441 kWh | $180 |
| August | 5.76 m/s | 1,525 kWh | $190 |
| September | 6.59 m/s | 1,980 kWh | $247 |
| October | 7.10 m/s | 2,355 kWh | $293 |
| November | 6.79 m/s | 2,099 kWh | $262 |
| December | 6.46 m/s | 1,961 kWh | $244 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Griggs County averages 5.19 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.22 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.205, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 19,582 to 28,601 kWh a year, 46% 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 | 5.98 m/s | 19,582 kWh | 41 years |
| 30 m | 6.5 m/s | 23,423 kWh | 34 years |
| 40 m | 6.9 m/s | 26,305 kWh | 31 years |
| 50 m | 7.22 m/s | 28,601 kWh | 28 years |
Counties around Griggs County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Stutsman County, averages 6.55 m/s.
- Steele County, ND: 6.41 m/s, 22,743 kWh, payback 35 years (24 mi)
- Foster County, ND: 6.52 m/s, 23,554 kWh, payback 34 years (30 mi)
- Nelson County, ND: 6.53 m/s, 23,628 kWh, payback 34 years (32 mi)
- Eddy County, ND: 6.52 m/s, 23,554 kWh, payback 34 years (36 mi)
- Barnes County, ND: 6.44 m/s, 22,964 kWh, payback 35 years (36 mi)
- Stutsman County, ND: 6.55 m/s, 23,775 kWh, payback 34 years (48 mi)
Sun versus wind in Griggs County
Griggs County gets 3.92 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,145 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,341. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 2.0 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.