Wind Turbine Payback in Nance County, NE
Wind turbine payback in Nance 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 Nance County, NE averages 6.55 m/s (14.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 23,775 kWh a year, worth $3,072 at NE's 12.92¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 33 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Nance County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Nance County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.8 m/s at the hub against 6.55 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,256 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,378, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 21¢/kWh, 1.6 times what NE pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.8 m/s instead of 6.55. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NE
Nance County is the 151st windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NE is Cherry County at 6.83 m/s, payback 30 years.
Month by month in Nance County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.37 m/s and about 2,437 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.37 m/s and 1,281 kWh, so the best month makes 1.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 45% of the year's output in Nance County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.83 m/s | 2,196 kWh | $284 |
| February | 6.84 m/s | 1,988 kWh | $257 |
| March | 7.03 m/s | 2,316 kWh | $299 |
| April | 7.37 m/s | 2,437 kWh | $315 |
| May | 6.71 m/s | 2,119 kWh | $274 |
| June | 6.14 m/s | 1,703 kWh | $220 |
| July | 5.39 m/s | 1,292 kWh | $167 |
| August | 5.37 m/s | 1,281 kWh | $166 |
| September | 6.52 m/s | 1,937 kWh | $250 |
| October | 6.84 m/s | 2,201 kWh | $284 |
| November | 6.89 m/s | 2,157 kWh | $279 |
| December | 6.74 m/s | 2,135 kWh | $276 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Nance County averages 5.15 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.32 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.218, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 19,664 to 29,299 kWh a year, 49% 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 | 5.99 m/s | 19,664 kWh | 39 years |
| 30 m | 6.55 m/s | 23,765 kWh | 33 years |
| 40 m | 6.97 m/s | 26,846 kWh | 29 years |
| 50 m | 7.32 m/s | 29,299 kWh | 26 years |
Counties around Nance County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Greeley County, averages 6.57 m/s.
- Merrick County, NE: 6.51 m/s, 23,481 kWh, payback 33 years (16 mi)
- Boone County, NE: 6.55 m/s, 23,775 kWh, payback 33 years (21 mi)
- Polk County, NE: 6.51 m/s, 23,481 kWh, payback 33 years (26 mi)
- Platte County, NE: 6.53 m/s, 23,628 kWh, payback 33 years (28 mi)
- Howard County, NE: 6.51 m/s, 23,481 kWh, payback 33 years (30 mi)
- Greeley County, NE: 6.57 m/s, 23,922 kWh, payback 32 years (30 mi)
Sun versus wind in Nance County
Nance County gets 4.3 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,256 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,378. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.9 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.