Wind Turbine Payback in Oneida County, ID
Wind turbine payback in Oneida 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 Oneida County, ID averages 3.88 m/s (8.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 5,989 kWh a year, worth $780 at ID's 13.02¢/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 Oneida County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Oneida County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.7 m/s at the hub against 3.88 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,326 kWh a year here against the turbine's 599, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 83¢/kWh, 6.4 times what ID pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.7 m/s instead of 3.88. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of ID
Oneida County is the 2,149th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in ID is Owyhee County at 5.38 m/s, payback 51 years.
Month by month in Oneida County
April is the strongest month here, at 4.38 m/s and about 711 kWh. January is the weakest, 3.48 m/s and 360 kWh, so the best month makes 2.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 41% of the year's output in Oneida County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.48 m/s | 360 kWh | $47 |
| February | 4.01 m/s | 509 kWh | $66 |
| March | 4.32 m/s | 704 kWh | $92 |
| April | 4.38 m/s | 711 kWh | $93 |
| May | 4.07 m/s | 587 kWh | $76 |
| June | 4.12 m/s | 592 kWh | $77 |
| July | 3.66 m/s | 423 kWh | $55 |
| August | 3.62 m/s | 410 kWh | $53 |
| September | 3.70 m/s | 423 kWh | $55 |
| October | 3.71 m/s | 444 kWh | $58 |
| November | 3.70 m/s | 426 kWh | $55 |
| December | 3.74 m/s | 454 kWh | $59 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Oneida County averages 3.13 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.28 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.194, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 4,665 to 8,064 kWh a year, 73% 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 | 3.58 m/s | 4,665 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.88 m/s | 5,971 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 4.1 m/s | 7,083 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 4.28 m/s | 8,064 kWh | 95 years |
Counties around Oneida County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Cassia County, averages 4.98 m/s.
- Franklin County, ID: 3.67 m/s, 5,034 kWh, payback over 100 years (36 mi)
- Bannock County, ID: 4.31 m/s, 8,233 kWh, payback 93 years (38 mi)
- Power County, ID: 4.79 m/s, 11,147 kWh, payback 69 years (39 mi)
- Box Elder County, UT: 4.17 m/s, 7,461 kWh, payback over 100 years (48 mi)
- Cache County, UT: 3.08 m/s, 2,844 kWh, payback over 100 years (51 mi)
- Cassia County, ID: 4.98 m/s, 12,400 kWh, payback 62 years (57 mi)
Sun versus wind in Oneida County
Oneida County gets 4.54 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,326 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 599. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.2 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.