Wind Turbine Payback in Haines Borough, AK
Wind turbine payback in Haines Borough
No. The turbine wears out before it pays for itself.
At 30 m, the height a home turbine tower usually reaches, the wind in Haines Borough, AK averages 3.76 m/s (8.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 5,432 kWh a year, worth $1,484 at AK's 27.32¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 67 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Haines Borough
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Haines Borough unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 5.8 m/s at the hub against 3.76 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 736 kWh a year here against the turbine's 543, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 92¢/kWh, 3.4 times what AK pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 5.8 m/s instead of 3.76. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of AK
Haines Borough is the 2,236th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in AK is Aleutians West Census Area at 9.35 m/s, payback 9 years.
Month by month in Haines Borough
January is the strongest month here, at 5.10 m/s and about 1,120 kWh. June is the weakest, 2.28 m/s and 78 kWh, so the best month makes 14.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 74% of the year's output in Haines Borough.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.10 m/s | 1,120 kWh | $306 |
| February | 4.61 m/s | 769 kWh | $210 |
| March | 4.71 m/s | 906 kWh | $248 |
| April | 3.25 m/s | 279 kWh | $76 |
| May | 2.65 m/s | 143 kWh | $39 |
| June | 2.28 m/s | 78 kWh | $21 |
| July | 2.44 m/s | 105 kWh | $29 |
| August | 2.81 m/s | 177 kWh | $48 |
| September | 3.49 m/s | 352 kWh | $96 |
| October | 3.95 m/s | 539 kWh | $147 |
| November | 4.92 m/s | 986 kWh | $269 |
| December | 4.92 m/s | 1,019 kWh | $278 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Haines Borough averages 3.2 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.05 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.146, typical of very open, smooth ground where height adds little. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 4,501 to 6,831 kWh a year, 52% 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 | 3.54 m/s | 4,501 kWh | 81 years |
| 30 m | 3.76 m/s | 5,427 kWh | 67 years |
| 40 m | 3.92 m/s | 6,183 kWh | 59 years |
| 50 m | 4.05 m/s | 6,831 kWh | 54 years |
Counties around Haines Borough
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Sitka City and Borough, averages 6.4 m/s.
- Skagway Municipality, AK: 2.81 m/s, 2,073 kWh, payback over 100 years (33 mi)
- Hoonah-Angoon Census Area, AK: 4.48 m/s, 9,219 kWh, payback 40 years (49 mi)
- Juneau City and Borough, AK: 3.89 m/s, 6,037 kWh, payback 61 years (71 mi)
- Sitka City and Borough, AK: 6.4 m/s, 22,669 kWh, payback 16 years (132 mi)
- Petersburg Borough, AK: 3.97 m/s, 6,428 kWh, payback 57 years (166 mi)
- Yakutat City and Borough, AK: 3.62 m/s, 4,820 kWh, payback 76 years (181 mi)
Sun versus wind in Haines Borough
Haines Borough gets 2.52 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 736 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 543. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.4 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.