Wind Turbine Payback in McDonald County, MO
Wind turbine payback in McDonald 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 McDonald County, MO averages 4.69 m/s (10.5 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 10,508 kWh a year, worth $1,501 at MO's 14.28¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 67 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in McDonald County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in McDonald County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.2 m/s at the hub against 4.69 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,294 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,051, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 48¢/kWh, 3.3 times what MO pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.2 m/s instead of 4.69. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MO
McDonald County is the 1,626th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MO is Atchison County at 6.17 m/s, payback 33 years.
Month by month in McDonald County
April is the strongest month here, at 5.48 m/s and about 1,308 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.64 m/s and 417 kWh, so the best month makes 3.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 52% of the year's output in McDonald County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.12 m/s | 1,132 kWh | $162 |
| February | 5.26 m/s | 1,100 kWh | $157 |
| March | 5.40 m/s | 1,299 kWh | $185 |
| April | 5.48 m/s | 1,308 kWh | $187 |
| May | 4.72 m/s | 906 kWh | $129 |
| June | 4.24 m/s | 644 kWh | $92 |
| July | 3.64 m/s | 417 kWh | $60 |
| August | 3.69 m/s | 436 kWh | $62 |
| September | 4.05 m/s | 562 kWh | $80 |
| October | 4.70 m/s | 897 kWh | $128 |
| November | 5.08 m/s | 1,076 kWh | $154 |
| December | 4.99 m/s | 1,058 kWh | $151 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in McDonald County averages 3.33 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.5 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.312, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 7,261 to 16,037 kWh a year, 121% 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 | 4.13 m/s | 7,261 kWh | 96 years |
| 30 m | 4.69 m/s | 10,506 kWh | 67 years |
| 40 m | 5.13 m/s | 13,422 kWh | 52 years |
| 50 m | 5.5 m/s | 16,037 kWh | 44 years |
Counties around McDonald County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Ottawa County, averages 5.88 m/s.
- Newton County, MO: 5.78 m/s, 18,079 kWh, payback 39 years (19 mi)
- Benton County, AR: 4.69 m/s, 10,508 kWh, payback 69 years (21 mi)
- Barry County, MO: 4.39 m/s, 8,690 kWh, payback 81 years (29 mi)
- Ottawa County, OK: 5.88 m/s, 18,816 kWh, payback 39 years (29 mi)
- Delaware County, OK: 5.2 m/s, 13,907 kWh, payback 52 years (30 mi)
- Jasper County, MO: 5.78 m/s, 18,079 kWh, payback 39 years (40 mi)
Sun versus wind in McDonald County
McDonald County gets 4.43 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,294 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,051. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.2 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.