Wind Turbine Payback in Lake County, OR
Wind turbine payback in Lake 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 Lake County, OR averages 4.75 m/s (10.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 10,890 kWh a year, worth $1,684 at OR's 15.46¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 59 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Lake County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Lake County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.75 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,367 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,089, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 46¢/kWh, 3.0 times what OR pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.75. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OR
Lake County is the 1,589th 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 Lake County
December is the strongest month here, at 5.71 m/s and about 1,494 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.69 m/s and 435 kWh, so the best month makes 3.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 59% of the year's output in Lake County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.41 m/s | 1,308 kWh | $202 |
| February | 5.42 m/s | 1,186 kWh | $183 |
| March | 5.59 m/s | 1,417 kWh | $219 |
| April | 4.97 m/s | 1,011 kWh | $156 |
| May | 4.49 m/s | 789 kWh | $122 |
| June | 4.22 m/s | 634 kWh | $98 |
| July | 3.70 m/s | 438 kWh | $68 |
| August | 3.69 m/s | 435 kWh | $67 |
| September | 3.91 m/s | 505 kWh | $78 |
| October | 4.53 m/s | 808 kWh | $125 |
| November | 5.38 m/s | 1,250 kWh | $193 |
| December | 5.71 m/s | 1,494 kWh | $231 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Lake County averages 3.71 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.33 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.225, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 8,386 to 14,821 kWh a year, 77% 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 | 4.34 m/s | 8,386 kWh | 77 years |
| 30 m | 4.75 m/s | 10,898 kWh | 59 years |
| 40 m | 5.07 m/s | 13,003 kWh | 50 years |
| 50 m | 5.33 m/s | 14,821 kWh | 44 years |
Counties around Lake County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Harney County, averages 4.99 m/s.
- Klamath County, OR: 3.28 m/s, 3,506 kWh, payback over 100 years (64 mi)
- Harney County, OR: 4.99 m/s, 12,467 kWh, payback 52 years (73 mi)
- Modoc County, CA: 4.73 m/s, 10,762 kWh, payback 29 years (84 mi)
- Deschutes County, OR: 4.23 m/s, 7,787 kWh, payback 83 years (88 mi)
- Crook County, OR: 4.99 m/s, 12,467 kWh, payback 52 years (95 mi)
- Jackson County, OR: 2.98 m/s, 2,542 kWh, payback over 100 years (119 mi)
Sun versus wind in Lake County
Lake County gets 4.68 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,367 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,089. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.3 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.