Wind Turbine Payback in Lapeer County, MI
Wind turbine payback in Lapeer 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 Lapeer County, MI averages 6.23 m/s (13.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,410 kWh a year, worth $4,652 at MI's 21.73¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 22 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Lapeer County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Lapeer County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.4 m/s at the hub against 6.23 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,080 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,141, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 23¢/kWh, 1.1 times what MI pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.4 m/s instead of 6.23. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MI
Lapeer County is the 550th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MI is Keweenaw County at 7.4 m/s, payback 15 years.
Month by month in Lapeer County
January is the strongest month here, at 7.10 m/s and about 2,359 kWh. July is the weakest, 4.88 m/s and 994 kWh, so the best month makes 2.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 51% of the year's output in Lapeer County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 7.10 m/s | 2,359 kWh | $513 |
| February | 7.06 m/s | 2,107 kWh | $458 |
| March | 6.72 m/s | 2,124 kWh | $462 |
| April | 6.93 m/s | 2,183 kWh | $474 |
| May | 5.92 m/s | 1,625 kWh | $353 |
| June | 5.34 m/s | 1,224 kWh | $266 |
| July | 4.88 m/s | 994 kWh | $216 |
| August | 4.90 m/s | 1,009 kWh | $219 |
| September | 5.51 m/s | 1,325 kWh | $288 |
| October | 6.61 m/s | 2,057 kWh | $447 |
| November | 6.91 m/s | 2,168 kWh | $471 |
| December | 6.89 m/s | 2,229 kWh | $484 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Lapeer County averages 4.9 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.96 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.218, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 17,490 to 26,756 kWh a year, 53% 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 | 5.7 m/s | 17,490 kWh | 26 years |
| 30 m | 6.23 m/s | 21,384 kWh | 22 years |
| 40 m | 6.63 m/s | 24,359 kWh | 19 years |
| 50 m | 6.96 m/s | 26,756 kWh | 17 years |
Counties around Lapeer County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Sanilac County, averages 7.01 m/s.
- Genesee County, MI: 6.13 m/s, 20,668 kWh, payback 22 years (25 mi)
- Tuscola County, MI: 6.5 m/s, 23,407 kWh, payback 20 years (30 mi)
- St. Clair County, MI: 6.42 m/s, 22,817 kWh, payback 20 years (30 mi)
- Oakland County, MI: 6.17 m/s, 20,965 kWh, payback 22 years (31 mi)
- Macomb County, MI: 6.17 m/s, 20,965 kWh, payback 22 years (33 mi)
- Sanilac County, MI: 7.01 m/s, 27,114 kWh, payback 17 years (38 mi)
Sun versus wind in Lapeer County
Lapeer 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 2,141. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 2.0 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.