Wind Turbine Payback in Murray County, MN
Wind turbine payback in Murray 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 Murray County, MN averages 6.68 m/s (14.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 24,728 kWh a year, worth $4,065 at MN's 16.44¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 25 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Murray County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Murray County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.5 m/s at the hub against 6.68 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,165 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,473, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 20¢/kWh, 1.2 times what MN pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.5 m/s instead of 6.68. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MN
Murray County is the 70th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MN is Lincoln County at 6.68 m/s, payback 25 years.
Month by month in Murray County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.40 m/s and about 2,451 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.47 m/s and 1,344 kWh, so the best month makes 1.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 46% of the year's output in Murray County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 7.01 m/s | 2,302 kWh | $378 |
| February | 6.99 m/s | 2,069 kWh | $340 |
| March | 7.07 m/s | 2,340 kWh | $385 |
| April | 7.40 m/s | 2,451 kWh | $403 |
| May | 6.89 m/s | 2,231 kWh | $367 |
| June | 6.18 m/s | 1,730 kWh | $284 |
| July | 5.50 m/s | 1,360 kWh | $224 |
| August | 5.47 m/s | 1,344 kWh | $221 |
| September | 6.62 m/s | 1,997 kWh | $328 |
| October | 7.04 m/s | 2,318 kWh | $381 |
| November | 7.12 m/s | 2,291 kWh | $377 |
| December | 6.86 m/s | 2,214 kWh | $364 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Murray County averages 5.32 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.42 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.207, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 20,728 to 29,989 kWh a year, 45% 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 | 6.14 m/s | 20,728 kWh | 29 years |
| 30 m | 6.68 m/s | 24,695 kWh | 25 years |
| 40 m | 7.09 m/s | 27,649 kWh | 22 years |
| 50 m | 7.42 m/s | 29,989 kWh | 20 years |
Counties around Murray County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Murray County.
- Nobles County, MN: 6.57 m/s, 23,922 kWh, payback 25 years (23 mi)
- Pipestone County, MN: 6.65 m/s, 24,509 kWh, payback 25 years (25 mi)
- Lyon County, MN: 6.5 m/s, 23,407 kWh, payback 26 years (28 mi)
- Cottonwood County, MN: 6.53 m/s, 23,628 kWh, payback 26 years (29 mi)
- Rock County, MN: 6.46 m/s, 23,112 kWh, payback 26 years (35 mi)
- Redwood County, MN: 6.34 m/s, 22,225 kWh, payback 27 years (37 mi)
Sun versus wind in Murray County
Murray County gets 3.99 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,165 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,473. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 2.1 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.