Wind Turbine Payback in Malheur County, OR
Wind turbine payback in Malheur 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 Malheur County, OR averages 4.65 m/s (10.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 10,257 kWh a year, worth $1,586 at OR's 15.46¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 63 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Malheur County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Malheur County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.65 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,323 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,026, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 49¢/kWh, 3.2 times what OR pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.65. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OR
Malheur County is the 1,659th 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 Malheur County
March is the strongest month here, at 5.29 m/s and about 1,232 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.95 m/s and 537 kWh, so the best month makes 2.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 53% of the year's output in Malheur County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.95 m/s | 1,035 kWh | $160 |
| February | 5.13 m/s | 1,027 kWh | $159 |
| March | 5.29 m/s | 1,232 kWh | $190 |
| April | 4.97 m/s | 1,016 kWh | $157 |
| May | 4.52 m/s | 803 kWh | $124 |
| June | 4.32 m/s | 683 kWh | $106 |
| July | 3.97 m/s | 545 kWh | $84 |
| August | 3.95 m/s | 537 kWh | $83 |
| September | 4.00 m/s | 542 kWh | $84 |
| October | 4.46 m/s | 771 kWh | $119 |
| November | 4.98 m/s | 1,021 kWh | $158 |
| December | 5.26 m/s | 1,216 kWh | $188 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Malheur County averages 3.63 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.21 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 7,839 to 13,976 kWh a year, 78% 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 | 4.24 m/s | 7,839 kWh | 83 years |
| 30 m | 4.64 m/s | 10,222 kWh | 63 years |
| 40 m | 4.95 m/s | 12,231 kWh | 53 years |
| 50 m | 5.21 m/s | 13,976 kWh | 46 years |
Counties around Malheur County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Owyhee County, averages 5.38 m/s.
- Canyon County, ID: 4.3 m/s, 8,176 kWh, payback 94 years (54 mi)
- Harney County, OR: 4.99 m/s, 12,467 kWh, payback 52 years (70 mi)
- Payette County, ID: 3.86 m/s, 5,894 kWh, payback over 100 years (71 mi)
- Ada County, ID: 4.17 m/s, 7,461 kWh, payback over 100 years (71 mi)
- Owyhee County, ID: 5.38 m/s, 15,176 kWh, payback 51 years (83 mi)
- Gem County, ID: 3.76 m/s, 5,432 kWh, payback over 100 years (85 mi)
Sun versus wind in Malheur County
Malheur County gets 4.53 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,323 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,026. 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.