Wind Turbine Payback in Madison County, NE
Wind turbine payback in Madison 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 Madison County, NE averages 6.67 m/s (14.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 24,655 kWh a year, worth $3,185 at NE's 12.92¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 31 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Madison County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Madison County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.8 m/s at the hub against 6.67 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,256 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,466, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 20¢/kWh, 1.6 times what NE pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.8 m/s instead of 6.67. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NE
Madison County is the 82nd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NE is Cherry County at 6.83 m/s, payback 30 years.
Month by month in Madison County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.43 m/s and about 2,471 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.47 m/s and 1,343 kWh, so the best month makes 1.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 46% of the year's output in Madison County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 7.05 m/s | 2,325 kWh | $300 |
| February | 6.99 m/s | 2,070 kWh | $267 |
| March | 7.12 m/s | 2,368 kWh | $306 |
| April | 7.43 m/s | 2,471 kWh | $319 |
| May | 6.80 m/s | 2,171 kWh | $280 |
| June | 6.21 m/s | 1,749 kWh | $226 |
| July | 5.49 m/s | 1,354 kWh | $175 |
| August | 5.47 m/s | 1,343 kWh | $174 |
| September | 6.65 m/s | 2,015 kWh | $260 |
| October | 6.97 m/s | 2,276 kWh | $294 |
| November | 7.05 m/s | 2,250 kWh | $291 |
| December | 6.91 m/s | 2,243 kWh | $290 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Madison County averages 5.27 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.44 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.214, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 20,559 to 30,126 kWh a year, 47% 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 | 6.12 m/s | 20,559 kWh | 38 years |
| 30 m | 6.67 m/s | 24,652 kWh | 31 years |
| 40 m | 7.09 m/s | 27,706 kWh | 28 years |
| 50 m | 7.44 m/s | 30,126 kWh | 26 years |
Counties around Madison County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Antelope County, averages 6.71 m/s.
- Stanton County, NE: 6.54 m/s, 23,702 kWh, payback 33 years (22 mi)
- Platte County, NE: 6.53 m/s, 23,628 kWh, payback 33 years (24 mi)
- Pierce County, NE: 6.66 m/s, 24,582 kWh, payback 32 years (25 mi)
- Boone County, NE: 6.55 m/s, 23,775 kWh, payback 33 years (28 mi)
- Antelope County, NE: 6.71 m/s, 24,947 kWh, payback 31 years (30 mi)
- Wayne County, NE: 6.54 m/s, 23,702 kWh, payback 33 years (32 mi)
Sun versus wind in Madison County
Madison County gets 4.3 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,256 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,466. 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.