Wind Turbine Payback in Monroe County, FL
Wind turbine payback in Monroe 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 Monroe County, FL averages 4.94 m/s (11.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 12,132 kWh a year, worth $1,859 at FL's 15.32¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 54 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Monroe County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Monroe County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.94 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,518 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,213, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 41¢/kWh, 2.7 times what FL pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.94. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of FL
Monroe County is the 1,482nd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in FL is Brevard County at 5.62 m/s, payback 39 years.
Month by month in Monroe County
January is the strongest month here, at 5.69 m/s and about 1,482 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.58 m/s and 396 kWh, so the best month makes 3.7 times the worst. November to March brings in 55% of the year's output in Monroe County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.69 m/s | 1,482 kWh | $227 |
| February | 5.44 m/s | 1,199 kWh | $184 |
| March | 5.67 m/s | 1,465 kWh | $224 |
| April | 5.44 m/s | 1,285 kWh | $197 |
| May | 4.87 m/s | 989 kWh | $152 |
| June | 3.97 m/s | 530 kWh | $81 |
| July | 3.58 m/s | 396 kWh | $61 |
| August | 3.74 m/s | 454 kWh | $70 |
| September | 4.24 m/s | 646 kWh | $99 |
| October | 5.42 m/s | 1,316 kWh | $202 |
| November | 5.64 m/s | 1,401 kWh | $215 |
| December | 5.63 m/s | 1,442 kWh | $221 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Monroe County averages 4.23 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.31 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.141, typical of very open, smooth ground where height adds little. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 10,360 to 14,679 kWh a year, 42% 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 | 4.67 m/s | 10,360 kWh | 63 years |
| 30 m | 4.94 m/s | 12,139 kWh | 54 years |
| 40 m | 5.15 m/s | 13,529 kWh | 48 years |
| 50 m | 5.31 m/s | 14,679 kWh | 45 years |
Counties around Monroe County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Miami-Dade County, averages 5.33 m/s.
- Miami-Dade County, FL: 5.33 m/s, 14,821 kWh, payback 44 years (32 mi)
- Collier County, FL: 4.53 m/s, 9,519 kWh, payback 69 years (44 mi)
- Broward County, FL: 4.98 m/s, 12,400 kWh, payback 53 years (54 mi)
- Hendry County, FL: 4.29 m/s, 8,120 kWh, payback 80 years (66 mi)
- Palm Beach County, FL: 4.67 m/s, 10,382 kWh, payback 63 years (82 mi)
- Lee County, FL: 4.44 m/s, 8,982 kWh, payback 73 years (90 mi)
Sun versus wind in Monroe County
Monroe County gets 5.2 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,518 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,213. 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.