Wind Turbine Payback in Langlade County, WI
Wind turbine payback in Langlade 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 Langlade County, WI averages 5.8 m/s (13 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 18,226 kWh a year, worth $3,472 at WI's 19.05¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 29 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Langlade County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Langlade County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.9 m/s at the hub against 5.8 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,080 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,823, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 27¢/kWh, 1.4 times what WI pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.9 m/s instead of 5.8. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of WI
Langlade County is the 1,064th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in WI is Manitowoc County at 7.32 m/s, payback 18 years.
Month by month in Langlade County
January is the strongest month here, at 6.25 m/s and about 1,832 kWh. July is the weakest, 4.92 m/s and 1,022 kWh, so the best month makes 1.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 48% of the year's output in Langlade County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.25 m/s | 1,832 kWh | $349 |
| February | 6.48 m/s | 1,786 kWh | $340 |
| March | 6.19 m/s | 1,793 kWh | $342 |
| April | 6.35 m/s | 1,832 kWh | $349 |
| May | 5.74 m/s | 1,513 kWh | $288 |
| June | 5.28 m/s | 1,190 kWh | $227 |
| July | 4.92 m/s | 1,022 kWh | $195 |
| August | 4.93 m/s | 1,027 kWh | $196 |
| September | 5.54 m/s | 1,341 kWh | $255 |
| October | 5.98 m/s | 1,664 kWh | $317 |
| November | 5.99 m/s | 1,615 kWh | $308 |
| December | 5.98 m/s | 1,658 kWh | $316 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Langlade County averages 4.52 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.51 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 14,520 to 23,481 kWh a year, 62% 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 | 5.29 m/s | 14,520 kWh | 36 years |
| 30 m | 5.8 m/s | 18,206 kWh | 29 years |
| 40 m | 6.19 m/s | 21,102 kWh | 25 years |
| 50 m | 6.51 m/s | 23,481 kWh | 22 years |
Counties around Langlade County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Lincoln County, averages 6.15 m/s.
- Menominee County, WI: 5.94 m/s, 19,260 kWh, payback 27 years (27 mi)
- Forest County, WI: 4.98 m/s, 12,400 kWh, payback 42 years (32 mi)
- Lincoln County, WI: 6.15 m/s, 20,816 kWh, payback 25 years (33 mi)
- Shawano County, WI: 5.94 m/s, 19,260 kWh, payback 27 years (36 mi)
- Oneida County, WI: 5.8 m/s, 18,226 kWh, payback 29 years (39 mi)
- Marathon County, WI: 6.02 m/s, 19,852 kWh, payback 26 years (42 mi)
Sun versus wind in Langlade County
Langlade County gets 3.7 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,080 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,823. 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.