Wind Turbine Payback in Haakon County, SD
Wind turbine payback in Haakon 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 Haakon County, SD averages 6.3 m/s (14.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,929 kWh a year, worth $3,197 at SD's 14.58¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 31 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Haakon County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Haakon County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.1 m/s at the hub against 6.3 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,244 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,193, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 23¢/kWh, 1.6 times what SD pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.1 m/s instead of 6.3. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of SD
Haakon County is the 474th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in SD is Todd County at 6.77 m/s, payback 27 years.
Month by month in Haakon County
October is the strongest month here, at 6.73 m/s and about 2,131 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.62 m/s and 1,434 kWh, so the best month makes 1.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 43% of the year's output in Haakon County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.59 m/s | 2,042 kWh | $298 |
| February | 6.18 m/s | 1,616 kWh | $236 |
| March | 6.57 m/s | 2,031 kWh | $296 |
| April | 6.72 m/s | 2,057 kWh | $300 |
| May | 6.45 m/s | 1,958 kWh | $285 |
| June | 5.92 m/s | 1,572 kWh | $229 |
| July | 5.62 m/s | 1,434 kWh | $209 |
| August | 5.65 m/s | 1,457 kWh | $212 |
| September | 6.27 m/s | 1,786 kWh | $260 |
| October | 6.73 m/s | 2,131 kWh | $311 |
| November | 6.46 m/s | 1,900 kWh | $277 |
| December | 6.42 m/s | 1,935 kWh | $282 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Haakon County averages 4.99 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.02 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.212, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 18,084 to 27,186 kWh a year, 50% 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 | 5.78 m/s | 18,084 kWh | 38 years |
| 30 m | 6.3 m/s | 21,925 kWh | 31 years |
| 40 m | 6.7 m/s | 24,842 kWh | 28 years |
| 50 m | 7.02 m/s | 27,186 kWh | 25 years |
Counties around Haakon County
6 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Mellette County, averages 6.55 m/s.
- Stanley County, SD: 6.31 m/s, 22,003 kWh, payback 31 years (40 mi)
- Jackson County, SD: 6.49 m/s, 23,333 kWh, payback 29 years (42 mi)
- Jones County, SD: 6.34 m/s, 22,225 kWh, payback 31 years (48 mi)
- Ziebach County, SD: 6.41 m/s, 22,743 kWh, payback 30 years (49 mi)
- Meade County, SD: 6.32 m/s, 22,077 kWh, payback 31 years (62 mi)
- Mellette County, SD: 6.55 m/s, 23,775 kWh, payback 29 years (63 mi)
Sun versus wind in Haakon County
Haakon County gets 4.26 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,244 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,193. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.8 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.