Wind Turbine Payback in Medina County, OH
Wind turbine payback in Medina 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 Medina County, OH averages 5.65 m/s (12.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 17,126 kWh a year, worth $3,221 at OH's 18.81¢/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 Medina County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Medina County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.9 m/s at the hub against 5.65 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,060 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,713, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 29¢/kWh, 1.6 times what OH pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.9 m/s instead of 5.65. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OH
Medina County is the 1,147th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in OH is Lake County at 6.53 m/s, payback 23 years.
Month by month in Medina County
January is the strongest month here, at 6.72 m/s and about 2,123 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.29 m/s and 692 kWh, so the best month makes 3.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 54% of the year's output in Medina County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.72 m/s | 2,123 kWh | $399 |
| February | 6.52 m/s | 1,808 kWh | $340 |
| March | 6.30 m/s | 1,862 kWh | $350 |
| April | 6.34 m/s | 1,824 kWh | $343 |
| May | 5.31 m/s | 1,244 kWh | $234 |
| June | 4.84 m/s | 945 kWh | $178 |
| July | 4.34 m/s | 713 kWh | $134 |
| August | 4.29 m/s | 692 kWh | $130 |
| September | 4.79 m/s | 917 kWh | $172 |
| October | 5.87 m/s | 1,589 kWh | $299 |
| November | 6.26 m/s | 1,775 kWh | $334 |
| December | 6.34 m/s | 1,885 kWh | $355 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Medina County averages 4.37 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.37 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.234, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 13,495 to 22,447 kWh a year, 66% 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 | 5.14 m/s | 13,495 kWh | 39 years |
| 30 m | 5.65 m/s | 17,143 kWh | 31 years |
| 40 m | 6.05 m/s | 20,044 kWh | 27 years |
| 50 m | 6.37 m/s | 22,447 kWh | 24 years |
Counties around Medina County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Lorain County, averages 6.35 m/s.
- Summit County, OH: 4.24 m/s, 7,842 kWh, payback 68 years (19 mi)
- Wayne County, OH: 5.65 m/s, 17,126 kWh, payback 31 years (20 mi)
- Lorain County, OH: 6.35 m/s, 22,299 kWh, payback 24 years (27 mi)
- Ashland County, OH: 6 m/s, 19,704 kWh, payback 27 years (27 mi)
- Cuyahoga County, OH: 6.35 m/s, 22,299 kWh, payback 24 years (34 mi)
- Stark County, OH: 4.24 m/s, 7,842 kWh, payback 68 years (35 mi)
Sun versus wind in Medina County
Medina County gets 3.63 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,060 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,713. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.6 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.