Wind Turbine Payback in Hardin County, OH
Wind turbine payback in Hardin 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 Hardin County, OH averages 5.94 m/s (13.3 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 19,260 kWh a year, worth $3,623 at OH's 18.81¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 28 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Hardin County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Hardin County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.9 m/s at the hub against 5.94 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,145 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,926, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 26¢/kWh, 1.4 times what OH pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.9 m/s instead of 5.94. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OH
Hardin County is the 934th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in OH is Lake County at 6.53 m/s, payback 23 years.
Month by month in Hardin County
January is the strongest month here, at 6.92 m/s and about 2,247 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.38 m/s and 732 kWh, so the best month makes 3.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 53% of the year's output in Hardin County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.92 m/s | 2,247 kWh | $423 |
| February | 6.76 m/s | 1,940 kWh | $365 |
| March | 6.66 m/s | 2,087 kWh | $393 |
| April | 6.84 m/s | 2,126 kWh | $400 |
| May | 5.79 m/s | 1,544 kWh | $290 |
| June | 5.15 m/s | 1,116 kWh | $210 |
| July | 4.46 m/s | 771 kWh | $145 |
| August | 4.38 m/s | 732 kWh | $138 |
| September | 4.98 m/s | 1,021 kWh | $192 |
| October | 6.12 m/s | 1,752 kWh | $330 |
| November | 6.61 m/s | 1,988 kWh | $374 |
| December | 6.64 m/s | 2,076 kWh | $390 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Hardin County averages 4.64 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.66 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.225, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 15,456 to 24,582 kWh a year, 59% 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 | 5.42 m/s | 15,456 kWh | 34 years |
| 30 m | 5.94 m/s | 19,237 kWh | 28 years |
| 40 m | 6.33 m/s | 22,180 kWh | 24 years |
| 50 m | 6.66 m/s | 24,582 kWh | 22 years |
Counties around Hardin County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Wyandot County, averages 6.02 m/s.
- Logan County, OH: 5.94 m/s, 19,260 kWh, payback 28 years (20 mi)
- Wyandot County, OH: 6.02 m/s, 19,852 kWh, payback 27 years (22 mi)
- Hancock County, OH: 5.93 m/s, 19,186 kWh, payback 28 years (23 mi)
- Allen County, OH: 5.88 m/s, 18,816 kWh, payback 28 years (24 mi)
- Marion County, OH: 5.8 m/s, 18,226 kWh, payback 29 years (26 mi)
- Union County, OH: 5.8 m/s, 18,226 kWh, payback 29 years (30 mi)
Sun versus wind in Hardin County
Hardin 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 1,926. 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.