Wind Turbine Payback in Huron County, OH
Wind turbine payback in Huron 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 Huron County, OH averages 6 m/s (13.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 19,704 kWh a year, worth $3,706 at OH's 18.81¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 27 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Huron County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Huron County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.9 m/s at the hub against 6 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,075 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,970, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 25¢/kWh, 1.3 times what OH pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.9 m/s instead of 6. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OH
Huron County is the 840th 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 Huron County
January is the strongest month here, at 7.10 m/s and about 2,359 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.52 m/s and 801 kWh, so the best month makes 2.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 54% of the year's output in Huron County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 7.10 m/s | 2,359 kWh | $444 |
| February | 6.85 m/s | 1,994 kWh | $375 |
| March | 6.64 m/s | 2,075 kWh | $390 |
| April | 6.73 m/s | 2,061 kWh | $388 |
| May | 5.68 m/s | 1,476 kWh | $278 |
| June | 5.13 m/s | 1,104 kWh | $208 |
| July | 4.58 m/s | 833 kWh | $157 |
| August | 4.52 m/s | 801 kWh | $151 |
| September | 5.09 m/s | 1,078 kWh | $203 |
| October | 6.24 m/s | 1,823 kWh | $343 |
| November | 6.67 m/s | 2,024 kWh | $381 |
| December | 6.74 m/s | 2,136 kWh | $402 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Huron County averages 4.69 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.72 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.223, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 15,879 to 25,020 kWh a year, 58% 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 | 5.48 m/s | 15,879 kWh | 34 years |
| 30 m | 6 m/s | 19,678 kWh | 27 years |
| 40 m | 6.39 m/s | 22,623 kWh | 24 years |
| 50 m | 6.72 m/s | 25,020 kWh | 21 years |
Counties around Huron County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Erie County, averages 6.49 m/s.
- Erie County, OH: 6.49 m/s, 23,333 kWh, payback 23 years (17 mi)
- Richland County, OH: 6 m/s, 19,704 kWh, payback 27 years (26 mi)
- Crawford County, OH: 6.02 m/s, 19,852 kWh, payback 27 years (27 mi)
- Ashland County, OH: 6 m/s, 19,704 kWh, payback 27 years (27 mi)
- Seneca County, OH: 6.02 m/s, 19,852 kWh, payback 27 years (28 mi)
- Lorain County, OH: 6.35 m/s, 22,299 kWh, payback 24 years (30 mi)
Sun versus wind in Huron County
Huron County gets 3.68 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,075 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,970. 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.