Wind Turbine Payback in Houghton County, MI
Wind turbine payback in Houghton 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 Houghton County, MI averages 5.41 m/s (12.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 15,390 kWh a year, worth $3,344 at MI's 21.73¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 30 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Houghton County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Houghton County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.4 m/s at the hub against 5.41 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,040 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,539, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 32¢/kWh, 1.5 times what MI pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.4 m/s instead of 5.41. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MI
Houghton County is the 1,276th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MI is Keweenaw County at 7.4 m/s, payback 15 years.
Month by month in Houghton County
January is the strongest month here, at 6.44 m/s and about 1,949 kWh. June is the weakest, 4.26 m/s and 653 kWh, so the best month makes 3.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 55% of the year's output in Houghton County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.44 m/s | 1,949 kWh | $424 |
| February | 6.46 m/s | 1,770 kWh | $385 |
| March | 5.74 m/s | 1,507 kWh | $327 |
| April | 5.48 m/s | 1,305 kWh | $284 |
| May | 4.75 m/s | 924 kWh | $201 |
| June | 4.26 m/s | 653 kWh | $142 |
| July | 4.30 m/s | 696 kWh | $151 |
| August | 4.54 m/s | 815 kWh | $177 |
| September | 5.13 m/s | 1,103 kWh | $240 |
| October | 5.65 m/s | 1,452 kWh | $316 |
| November | 5.99 m/s | 1,615 kWh | $351 |
| December | 6.19 m/s | 1,792 kWh | $389 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Houghton County averages 4.2 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.08 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.230, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 12,030 to 20,297 kWh a year, 69% 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 | 4.92 m/s | 12,030 kWh | 38 years |
| 30 m | 5.41 m/s | 15,362 kWh | 30 years |
| 40 m | 5.78 m/s | 18,048 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 6.08 m/s | 20,297 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Houghton County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Keweenaw County, averages 7.4 m/s.
- Baraga County, MI: 4.27 m/s, 8,008 kWh, payback 58 years (25 mi)
- Keweenaw County, MI: 7.4 m/s, 29,851 kWh, payback 15 years (29 mi)
- Ontonagon County, MI: 5.67 m/s, 17,272 kWh, payback 27 years (32 mi)
- Marquette County, MI: 4.81 m/s, 11,276 kWh, payback 41 years (56 mi)
- Iron County, MI: 4.06 m/s, 6,883 kWh, payback 67 years (57 mi)
- Gogebic County, MI: 4.5 m/s, 9,339 kWh, payback 49 years (64 mi)
Sun versus wind in Houghton County
Houghton County gets 3.56 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,040 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,539. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.5 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.