Wind Turbine Payback in Missaukee County, MI
Wind turbine payback in Missaukee 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 Missaukee County, MI averages 5.29 m/s (11.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 14,538 kWh a year, worth $3,159 at MI's 21.73¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 32 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Missaukee County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Missaukee County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.4 m/s at the hub against 5.29 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,063 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,454, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 34¢/kWh, 1.6 times what MI pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.4 m/s instead of 5.29. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MI
Missaukee County is the 1,328th 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 Missaukee County
January is the strongest month here, at 5.95 m/s and about 1,642 kWh. July is the weakest, 4.29 m/s and 689 kWh, so the best month makes 2.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 52% of the year's output in Missaukee County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.95 m/s | 1,642 kWh | $357 |
| February | 6.11 m/s | 1,572 kWh | $342 |
| March | 5.71 m/s | 1,495 kWh | $325 |
| April | 5.78 m/s | 1,489 kWh | $324 |
| May | 5.09 m/s | 1,116 kWh | $243 |
| June | 4.51 m/s | 770 kWh | $167 |
| July | 4.29 m/s | 689 kWh | $150 |
| August | 4.41 m/s | 748 kWh | $163 |
| September | 4.81 m/s | 927 kWh | $201 |
| October | 5.42 m/s | 1,313 kWh | $285 |
| November | 5.67 m/s | 1,420 kWh | $309 |
| December | 5.78 m/s | 1,533 kWh | $333 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Missaukee County averages 3.92 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.08 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.273, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 10,790 to 20,297 kWh a year, 88% 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 | 4.73 m/s | 10,790 kWh | 43 years |
| 30 m | 5.29 m/s | 14,528 kWh | 32 years |
| 40 m | 5.72 m/s | 17,643 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 6.08 m/s | 20,297 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Missaukee County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Wexford County, averages 6.23 m/s.
- Roscommon County, MI: 4.1 m/s, 7,090 kWh, payback 65 years (23 mi)
- Wexford County, MI: 6.23 m/s, 21,410 kWh, payback 22 years (24 mi)
- Kalkaska County, MI: 5.29 m/s, 14,538 kWh, payback 32 years (24 mi)
- Osceola County, MI: 5.54 m/s, 16,326 kWh, payback 28 years (26 mi)
- Clare County, MI: 5.26 m/s, 14,327 kWh, payback 32 years (26 mi)
- Crawford County, MI: 4.1 m/s, 7,090 kWh, payback 65 years (34 mi)
Sun versus wind in Missaukee County
Missaukee County gets 3.64 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,063 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,454. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.4 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.