Wind Turbine Payback in Morgan County, UT
Wind turbine payback in Morgan 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 Morgan County, UT averages 3.22 m/s (7.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 3,299 kWh a year, worth $435 at UT's 13.19¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of over 100 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Morgan County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Morgan County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.7 m/s at the hub against 3.22 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,396 kWh a year here against the turbine's 330, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 152¢/kWh, 11.5 times what UT pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.7 m/s instead of 3.22. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of UT
Morgan County is the 2,857th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in UT is Daggett County at 5.32 m/s, payback 51 years.
Month by month in Morgan County
April is the strongest month here, at 3.62 m/s and about 398 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.00 m/s and 221 kWh, so the best month makes 1.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 42% of the year's output in Morgan County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.01 m/s | 224 kWh | $30 |
| February | 3.35 m/s | 288 kWh | $38 |
| March | 3.57 m/s | 392 kWh | $52 |
| April | 3.62 m/s | 398 kWh | $52 |
| May | 3.15 m/s | 261 kWh | $34 |
| June | 3.30 m/s | 293 kWh | $39 |
| July | 3.00 m/s | 221 kWh | $29 |
| August | 3.13 m/s | 254 kWh | $34 |
| September | 3.16 m/s | 255 kWh | $34 |
| October | 3.08 m/s | 242 kWh | $32 |
| November | 3.14 m/s | 251 kWh | $33 |
| December | 3.15 m/s | 261 kWh | $34 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Morgan County averages 2.5 m/s; at 50 m it is 3.63 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.232, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 2,412 to 4,862 kWh a year, 102% 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 | 2.93 m/s | 2,412 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.22 m/s | 3,314 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.45 m/s | 4,121 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 3.63 m/s | 4,862 kWh | over 100 years |
Counties around Morgan County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Rich County, averages 4.61 m/s.
- Weber County, UT: 3.08 m/s, 2,844 kWh, payback over 100 years (20 mi)
- Davis County, UT: 3.95 m/s, 6,329 kWh, payback over 100 years (33 mi)
- Salt Lake County, UT: 3.41 m/s, 3,980 kWh, payback over 100 years (34 mi)
- Summit County, UT: 3.82 m/s, 5,707 kWh, payback over 100 years (35 mi)
- Rich County, UT: 4.61 m/s, 10,008 kWh, payback 76 years (41 mi)
- Cache County, UT: 3.08 m/s, 2,844 kWh, payback over 100 years (45 mi)
Sun versus wind in Morgan County
Morgan County gets 4.78 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,396 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 330. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 4.2 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.