Wind Turbine Payback in Jones County, SD
Wind turbine payback in Jones 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 Jones County, SD averages 6.34 m/s (14.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 22,225 kWh a year, worth $3,240 at SD's 14.58¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 31 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Jones County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Jones County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.1 m/s at the hub against 6.34 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,253 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,223, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 22¢/kWh, 1.5 times what SD pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.1 m/s instead of 6.34. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of SD
Jones County is the 420th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in SD is Todd County at 6.77 m/s, payback 27 years.
Month by month in Jones County
October is the strongest month here, at 6.71 m/s and about 2,119 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.63 m/s and 1,440 kWh, so the best month makes 1.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 44% of the year's output in Jones County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.64 m/s | 2,075 kWh | $303 |
| February | 6.25 m/s | 1,656 kWh | $241 |
| March | 6.58 m/s | 2,036 kWh | $297 |
| April | 6.79 m/s | 2,099 kWh | $306 |
| May | 6.49 m/s | 1,980 kWh | $289 |
| June | 5.97 m/s | 1,600 kWh | $233 |
| July | 5.63 m/s | 1,440 kWh | $210 |
| August | 5.72 m/s | 1,496 kWh | $218 |
| September | 6.34 m/s | 1,829 kWh | $267 |
| October | 6.71 m/s | 2,119 kWh | $309 |
| November | 6.56 m/s | 1,959 kWh | $286 |
| December | 6.49 m/s | 1,980 kWh | $289 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Jones County averages 5.01 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.08 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.215, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 18,329 to 27,613 kWh a year, 51% 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 | 5.81 m/s | 18,329 kWh | 37 years |
| 30 m | 6.34 m/s | 22,252 kWh | 31 years |
| 40 m | 6.75 m/s | 25,227 kWh | 27 years |
| 50 m | 7.08 m/s | 27,613 kWh | 25 years |
Counties around Jones County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Mellette County, averages 6.55 m/s.
- Mellette County, SD: 6.55 m/s, 23,775 kWh, payback 29 years (26 mi)
- Stanley County, SD: 6.31 m/s, 22,003 kWh, payback 31 years (32 mi)
- Lyman County, SD: 6.35 m/s, 22,299 kWh, payback 31 years (42 mi)
- Hughes County, SD: 6.35 m/s, 22,299 kWh, payback 31 years (46 mi)
- Haakon County, SD: 6.3 m/s, 21,929 kWh, payback 31 years (48 mi)
- Jackson County, SD: 6.49 m/s, 23,333 kWh, payback 29 years (51 mi)
Sun versus wind in Jones County
Jones County gets 4.29 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,253 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,223. 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.