Wind Turbine Payback in Ontonagon County, MI
Wind turbine payback in Ontonagon 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 Ontonagon County, MI averages 5.67 m/s (12.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 17,272 kWh a year, worth $3,753 at MI's 21.73¢/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 Ontonagon County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Ontonagon County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.4 m/s at the hub against 5.67 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,040 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,727, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 29¢/kWh, 1.3 times what MI pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.4 m/s instead of 5.67. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MI
Ontonagon County is the 1,142nd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MI is Keweenaw County at 7.4 m/s, payback 15 years.
Month by month in Ontonagon County
January is the strongest month here, at 6.91 m/s and about 2,242 kWh. June is the weakest, 4.39 m/s and 712 kWh, so the best month makes 3.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 56% of the year's output in Ontonagon County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.91 m/s | 2,242 kWh | $487 |
| February | 6.85 m/s | 1,990 kWh | $432 |
| March | 5.95 m/s | 1,640 kWh | $356 |
| April | 5.66 m/s | 1,412 kWh | $307 |
| May | 4.84 m/s | 974 kWh | $212 |
| June | 4.39 m/s | 712 kWh | $155 |
| July | 4.47 m/s | 777 kWh | $169 |
| August | 4.69 m/s | 895 kWh | $194 |
| September | 5.38 m/s | 1,245 kWh | $271 |
| October | 5.96 m/s | 1,646 kWh | $358 |
| November | 6.40 m/s | 1,864 kWh | $405 |
| December | 6.68 m/s | 2,102 kWh | $457 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Ontonagon County averages 4.61 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.25 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.189, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 14,300 to 21,558 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 | 5.26 m/s | 14,300 kWh | 32 years |
| 30 m | 5.67 m/s | 17,307 kWh | 27 years |
| 40 m | 5.99 m/s | 19,644 kWh | 23 years |
| 50 m | 6.25 m/s | 21,558 kWh | 21 years |
Counties around Ontonagon County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Keweenaw County, averages 7.4 m/s.
- Houghton County, MI: 5.41 m/s, 15,390 kWh, payback 30 years (32 mi)
- Gogebic County, MI: 4.5 m/s, 9,339 kWh, payback 49 years (34 mi)
- Baraga County, MI: 4.27 m/s, 8,008 kWh, payback 58 years (44 mi)
- Vilas County, WI: 4.67 m/s, 10,382 kWh, payback 51 years (55 mi)
- Keweenaw County, MI: 7.4 m/s, 29,851 kWh, payback 15 years (57 mi)
- Iron County, MI: 4.06 m/s, 6,883 kWh, payback 67 years (58 mi)
Sun versus wind in Ontonagon County
Ontonagon County gets 3.56 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,040 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,727. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.7 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.