Wind Turbine Payback in Jackson County, OR
Wind turbine payback in Jackson 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 Jackson County, OR averages 2.98 m/s (6.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 2,542 kWh a year, worth $393 at OR's 15.46¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of over 100 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Jackson County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Jackson County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 2.98 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,329 kWh a year here against the turbine's 254, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 197¢/kWh, 12.7 times what OR pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 2.98. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OR
Jackson County is the 3,067th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in OR is Gilliam County at 5.48 m/s, payback 41 years.
Month by month in Jackson County
December is the strongest month here, at 3.65 m/s and about 421 kWh. July is the weakest, 2.51 m/s and 117 kWh, so the best month makes 3.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 62% of the year's output in Jackson County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.64 m/s | 415 kWh | $64 |
| February | 3.28 m/s | 269 kWh | $42 |
| March | 3.12 m/s | 253 kWh | $39 |
| April | 2.85 m/s | 179 kWh | $28 |
| May | 2.63 m/s | 138 kWh | $21 |
| June | 2.58 m/s | 125 kWh | $19 |
| July | 2.51 m/s | 117 kWh | $18 |
| August | 2.55 m/s | 124 kWh | $19 |
| September | 2.71 m/s | 150 kWh | $23 |
| October | 2.93 m/s | 205 kWh | $32 |
| November | 3.33 m/s | 303 kWh | $47 |
| December | 3.65 m/s | 421 kWh | $65 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Jackson County averages 1.98 m/s; at 50 m it is 3.61 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.373, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 1,488 to 4,778 kWh a year, 221% 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 | 2.56 m/s | 1,488 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 2.98 m/s | 2,553 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.32 m/s | 3,654 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 3.61 m/s | 4,778 kWh | over 100 years |
Counties around Jackson County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Curry County, averages 4.71 m/s.
- Josephine County, OR: 2.84 m/s, 2,152 kWh, payback over 100 years (46 mi)
- Klamath County, OR: 3.28 m/s, 3,506 kWh, payback over 100 years (56 mi)
- Siskiyou County, CA: 2.97 m/s, 2,513 kWh, payback over 100 years (57 mi)
- Douglas County, OR: 2.81 m/s, 2,073 kWh, payback over 100 years (65 mi)
- Curry County, OR: 4.71 m/s, 10,635 kWh, payback 61 years (78 mi)
- Del Norte County, CA: 2.88 m/s, 2,259 kWh, payback over 100 years (81 mi)
Sun versus wind in Jackson County
Jackson County gets 4.55 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,329 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 254. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 5.2 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.