Wind Turbine Payback in Lancaster County, PA
Wind turbine payback in Lancaster 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 Lancaster County, PA averages 4.14 m/s (9.3 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 7,301 kWh a year, worth $1,543 at PA's 21.13¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 65 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Lancaster County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Lancaster County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.5 m/s at the hub against 4.14 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,127 kWh a year here against the turbine's 730, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 68¢/kWh, 3.2 times what PA pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.5 m/s instead of 4.14. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of PA
Lancaster County is the 1,975th 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 Lancaster County
March is the strongest month here, at 4.96 m/s and about 1,043 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.09 m/s and 245 kWh, so the best month makes 4.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 59% of the year's output in Lancaster County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.89 m/s | 1,000 kWh | $211 |
| February | 5.02 m/s | 972 kWh | $205 |
| March | 4.96 m/s | 1,043 kWh | $220 |
| April | 4.68 m/s | 856 kWh | $181 |
| May | 3.86 m/s | 501 kWh | $106 |
| June | 3.52 m/s | 364 kWh | $77 |
| July | 3.19 m/s | 271 kWh | $57 |
| August | 3.09 m/s | 245 kWh | $52 |
| September | 3.46 m/s | 344 kWh | $73 |
| October | 4.05 m/s | 578 kWh | $122 |
| November | 4.36 m/s | 702 kWh | $148 |
| December | 4.63 m/s | 858 kWh | $181 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Lancaster County averages 2.85 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.92 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.339, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 4,762 to 11,999 kWh a year, 152% 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 | 3.61 m/s | 4,762 kWh | 99 years |
| 30 m | 4.14 m/s | 7,289 kWh | 65 years |
| 40 m | 4.56 m/s | 9,711 kWh | 49 years |
| 50 m | 4.92 m/s | 11,999 kWh | 39 years |
Counties around Lancaster County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Harford County, averages 4.83 m/s.
- Lebanon County, PA: 3.6 m/s, 4,736 kWh, payback 100 years (25 mi)
- York County, PA: 4.25 m/s, 7,897 kWh, payback 60 years (27 mi)
- Chester County, PA: 3.92 m/s, 6,182 kWh, payback 77 years (27 mi)
- Berks County, PA: 3.62 m/s, 4,820 kWh, payback 98 years (31 mi)
- Harford County, MD: 4.83 m/s, 11,407 kWh, payback 41 years (35 mi)
- Cecil County, MD: 4.83 m/s, 11,407 kWh, payback 41 years (37 mi)
Sun versus wind in Lancaster County
Lancaster County gets 3.86 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,127 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 730. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.5 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.