Wind Turbine Payback in Lackawanna County, PA
Wind turbine payback in Lackawanna 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 Lackawanna County, PA averages 3.71 m/s (8.3 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 5,209 kWh a year, worth $1,101 at PA's 21.13¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 91 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Lackawanna County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Lackawanna County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.5 m/s at the hub against 3.71 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,072 kWh a year here against the turbine's 521, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 96¢/kWh, 4.5 times what PA pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.5 m/s instead of 3.71. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of PA
Lackawanna County is the 2,280th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in PA is Philadelphia County at 4.74 m/s, payback 44 years.
Month by month in Lackawanna County
January is the strongest month here, at 4.52 m/s and about 805 kWh. August is the weakest, 2.84 m/s and 183 kWh, so the best month makes 4.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 62% of the year's output in Lackawanna County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.52 m/s | 805 kWh | $170 |
| February | 4.68 m/s | 803 kWh | $170 |
| March | 4.47 m/s | 776 kWh | $164 |
| April | 4.11 m/s | 585 kWh | $124 |
| May | 3.41 m/s | 338 kWh | $71 |
| June | 3.09 m/s | 236 kWh | $50 |
| July | 2.87 m/s | 190 kWh | $40 |
| August | 2.84 m/s | 183 kWh | $39 |
| September | 3.10 m/s | 238 kWh | $50 |
| October | 3.53 m/s | 377 kWh | $80 |
| November | 3.83 m/s | 471 kWh | $100 |
| December | 4.19 m/s | 641 kWh | $135 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Lackawanna County averages 2.31 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.63 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.432, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 2,959 to 10,132 kWh a year, 242% 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 | 3.12 m/s | 2,959 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.71 m/s | 5,222 kWh | 91 years |
| 40 m | 4.2 m/s | 7,648 kWh | 62 years |
| 50 m | 4.63 m/s | 10,132 kWh | 47 years |
Counties around Lackawanna County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Lackawanna County.
- Wyoming County, PA: 3.61 m/s, 4,778 kWh, payback 99 years (22 mi)
- Wayne County, PA: 3.64 m/s, 4,905 kWh, payback 97 years (22 mi)
- Luzerne County, PA: 3.48 m/s, 4,250 kWh, payback over 100 years (26 mi)
- Susquehanna County, PA: 3.7 m/s, 5,164 kWh, payback 92 years (28 mi)
- Monroe County, PA: 3.61 m/s, 4,778 kWh, payback 99 years (30 mi)
- Pike County, PA: 3.64 m/s, 4,905 kWh, payback 97 years (31 mi)
Sun versus wind in Lackawanna County
Lackawanna County gets 3.67 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,072 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 521. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.1 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.