Wind Turbine Payback in Ohio County, KY
Wind turbine payback in Ohio 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 Ohio County, KY averages 4.35 m/s (9.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 8,460 kWh a year, worth $1,201 at KY's 14.2¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 83 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Ohio County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Ohio County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.2 m/s at the hub against 4.35 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,215 kWh a year here against the turbine's 846, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 59¢/kWh, 4.2 times what KY pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.2 m/s instead of 4.35. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of KY
Ohio County is the 1,852nd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in KY is Fulton County at 5.54 m/s, payback 43 years.
Month by month in Ohio County
March is the strongest month here, at 5.16 m/s and about 1,160 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.19 m/s and 271 kWh, so the best month makes 4.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 57% of the year's output in Ohio County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.08 m/s | 1,110 kWh | $158 |
| February | 5.11 m/s | 1,021 kWh | $145 |
| March | 5.16 m/s | 1,160 kWh | $165 |
| April | 5.17 m/s | 1,127 kWh | $160 |
| May | 4.25 m/s | 670 kWh | $95 |
| June | 3.59 m/s | 385 kWh | $55 |
| July | 3.19 m/s | 271 kWh | $38 |
| August | 3.21 m/s | 276 kWh | $39 |
| September | 3.63 m/s | 399 kWh | $57 |
| October | 4.34 m/s | 714 kWh | $101 |
| November | 4.71 m/s | 872 kWh | $124 |
| December | 4.82 m/s | 966 kWh | $137 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Ohio County averages 3.05 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.13 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.323, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 5,687 to 13,421 kWh a year, 136% 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 | 3.82 m/s | 5,687 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.35 m/s | 8,458 kWh | 83 years |
| 40 m | 4.77 m/s | 11,039 kWh | 64 years |
| 50 m | 5.13 m/s | 13,421 kWh | 53 years |
Counties around Ohio County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, McLean County, averages 4.88 m/s.
- Butler County, KY: 4.38 m/s, 8,632 kWh, payback 82 years (21 mi)
- Daviess County, KY: 4.35 m/s, 8,460 kWh, payback 83 years (22 mi)
- McLean County, KY: 4.88 m/s, 11,734 kWh, payback 60 years (23 mi)
- Muhlenberg County, KY: 4.38 m/s, 8,632 kWh, payback 82 years (24 mi)
- Hancock County, KY: 4.53 m/s, 9,519 kWh, payback 74 years (25 mi)
- Grayson County, KY: 4.2 m/s, 7,623 kWh, payback 92 years (27 mi)
Sun versus wind in Ohio County
Ohio County gets 4.16 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,215 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 846. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.4 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.