Wind Turbine Payback in Olmsted County, MN
Wind turbine payback in Olmsted 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 Olmsted County, MN averages 6.37 m/s (14.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 22,447 kWh a year, worth $3,690 at MN's 16.44¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 27 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Olmsted County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Olmsted County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.5 m/s at the hub against 6.37 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,142 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,245, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 22¢/kWh, 1.4 times what MN pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.5 m/s instead of 6.37. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MN
Olmsted County is the 380th 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 Olmsted County
January is the strongest month here, at 6.95 m/s and about 2,266 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.16 m/s and 1,156 kWh, so the best month makes 2.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 47% of the year's output in Olmsted County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.95 m/s | 2,266 kWh | $373 |
| February | 6.94 m/s | 2,042 kWh | $336 |
| March | 6.80 m/s | 2,173 kWh | $357 |
| April | 7.04 m/s | 2,246 kWh | $369 |
| May | 6.42 m/s | 1,938 kWh | $319 |
| June | 5.84 m/s | 1,522 kWh | $250 |
| July | 5.20 m/s | 1,183 kWh | $194 |
| August | 5.16 m/s | 1,156 kWh | $190 |
| September | 6.19 m/s | 1,734 kWh | $285 |
| October | 6.64 m/s | 2,073 kWh | $341 |
| November | 6.75 m/s | 2,076 kWh | $341 |
| December | 6.59 m/s | 2,045 kWh | $336 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Olmsted County averages 5.02 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.11 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.216, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 18,472 to 27,826 kWh a year, 51% 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 | 5.83 m/s | 18,472 kWh | 33 years |
| 30 m | 6.37 m/s | 22,427 kWh | 27 years |
| 40 m | 6.78 m/s | 25,424 kWh | 24 years |
| 50 m | 7.11 m/s | 27,826 kWh | 22 years |
Counties around Olmsted County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Dodge County, averages 6.45 m/s.
- Wabasha County, MN: 6.14 m/s, 20,742 kWh, payback 29 years (22 mi)
- Dodge County, MN: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 26 years (23 mi)
- Fillmore County, MN: 6.22 m/s, 21,336 kWh, payback 29 years (27 mi)
- Mower County, MN: 6.37 m/s, 22,447 kWh, payback 27 years (29 mi)
- Winona County, MN: 6.17 m/s, 20,965 kWh, payback 29 years (31 mi)
- Goodhue County, MN: 6.14 m/s, 20,742 kWh, payback 29 years (32 mi)
Sun versus wind in Olmsted County
Olmsted County gets 3.91 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,142 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,245. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 2.0 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.