Wind Turbine Payback in Jasper County, IN
Wind turbine payback in Jasper 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 Jasper County, IN averages 5.97 m/s (13.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 19,482 kWh a year, worth $3,320 at IN's 17.04¢/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 Jasper County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Jasper County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.3 m/s at the hub against 5.97 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,121 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,948, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 26¢/kWh, 1.5 times what IN pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.3 m/s instead of 5.97. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of IN
Jasper County is the 891st windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in IN is Lake County at 6.17 m/s, payback 28 years.
Month by month in Jasper County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.90 m/s and about 2,165 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.55 m/s and 819 kWh, so the best month makes 2.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 51% of the year's output in Jasper County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.71 m/s | 2,116 kWh | $361 |
| February | 6.63 m/s | 1,866 kWh | $318 |
| March | 6.57 m/s | 2,033 kWh | $346 |
| April | 6.90 m/s | 2,165 kWh | $369 |
| May | 5.98 m/s | 1,664 kWh | $284 |
| June | 5.20 m/s | 1,143 kWh | $195 |
| July | 4.57 m/s | 828 kWh | $141 |
| August | 4.55 m/s | 819 kWh | $140 |
| September | 5.19 m/s | 1,138 kWh | $194 |
| October | 6.22 m/s | 1,815 kWh | $309 |
| November | 6.63 m/s | 2,005 kWh | $342 |
| December | 6.51 m/s | 1,994 kWh | $340 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Jasper County averages 4.65 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.7 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.227, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 15,618 to 24,874 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 | 5.44 m/s | 15,618 kWh | 38 years |
| 30 m | 5.97 m/s | 19,456 kWh | 30 years |
| 40 m | 6.37 m/s | 22,440 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 6.7 m/s | 24,874 kWh | 24 years |
Counties around Jasper County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Lake County, averages 6.17 m/s.
- Newton County, IN: 6.01 m/s, 19,778 kWh, payback 30 years (15 mi)
- Pulaski County, IN: 5.97 m/s, 19,482 kWh, payback 30 years (22 mi)
- White County, IN: 5.97 m/s, 19,482 kWh, payback 30 years (23 mi)
- Benton County, IN: 5.99 m/s, 19,630 kWh, payback 30 years (31 mi)
- Starke County, IN: 6.1 m/s, 20,446 kWh, payback 29 years (31 mi)
- Lake County, IN: 6.17 m/s, 20,965 kWh, payback 28 years (34 mi)
Sun versus wind in Jasper County
Jasper County gets 3.84 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,121 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,948. 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.