Wind Turbine Payback in Houston County, MN
Wind turbine payback in Houston 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 Houston County, MN averages 6.09 m/s (13.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 20,371 kWh a year, worth $3,349 at MN's 16.44¢/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 Houston County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Houston County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.5 m/s at the hub against 6.09 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,136 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,037, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 25¢/kWh, 1.5 times what MN pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.5 m/s instead of 6.09. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MN
Houston County is the 701st windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MN is Lincoln County at 6.68 m/s, payback 25 years.
Month by month in Houston County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.86 m/s and about 2,139 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.90 m/s and 1,008 kWh, so the best month makes 2.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 47% of the year's output in Houston County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.59 m/s | 2,044 kWh | $336 |
| February | 6.70 m/s | 1,907 kWh | $314 |
| March | 6.55 m/s | 2,016 kWh | $331 |
| April | 6.86 m/s | 2,139 kWh | $352 |
| May | 6.16 m/s | 1,775 kWh | $292 |
| June | 5.55 m/s | 1,349 kWh | $222 |
| July | 4.96 m/s | 1,043 kWh | $171 |
| August | 4.90 m/s | 1,008 kWh | $166 |
| September | 5.83 m/s | 1,516 kWh | $249 |
| October | 6.38 m/s | 1,915 kWh | $315 |
| November | 6.43 m/s | 1,881 kWh | $309 |
| December | 6.22 m/s | 1,814 kWh | $298 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Houston County averages 4.79 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.81 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.219, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 16,557 to 25,675 kWh a year, 55% 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 | 5.57 m/s | 16,557 kWh | 37 years |
| 30 m | 6.09 m/s | 20,366 kWh | 30 years |
| 40 m | 6.49 m/s | 23,298 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 6.81 m/s | 25,675 kWh | 24 years |
Counties around Houston County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Fillmore County, averages 6.22 m/s.
- La Crosse County, WI: 6.03 m/s, 19,926 kWh, payback 26 years (26 mi)
- Winona County, MN: 6.17 m/s, 20,965 kWh, payback 29 years (26 mi)
- Allamakee County, IA: 6.09 m/s, 20,371 kWh, payback 34 years (28 mi)
- Fillmore County, MN: 6.22 m/s, 21,336 kWh, payback 29 years (30 mi)
- Winneshiek County, IA: 6.22 m/s, 21,336 kWh, payback 32 years (31 mi)
- Vernon County, WI: 6.09 m/s, 20,371 kWh, payback 26 years (34 mi)
Sun versus wind in Houston County
Houston County gets 3.89 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,136 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,037. 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.