Wind Turbine Payback in Price County, WI
Wind turbine payback in Price 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 Price County, WI averages 5.7 m/s (12.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 17,492 kWh a year, worth $3,332 at WI's 19.05¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 30 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Price County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Price County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.9 m/s at the hub against 5.7 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,092 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,749, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 29¢/kWh, 1.5 times what WI pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.9 m/s instead of 5.7. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of WI
Price County is the 1,132nd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in WI is Manitowoc County at 7.32 m/s, payback 18 years.
Month by month in Price County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.30 m/s and about 1,803 kWh. July is the weakest, 4.85 m/s and 980 kWh, so the best month makes 1.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 46% of the year's output in Price County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.99 m/s | 1,667 kWh | $318 |
| February | 6.27 m/s | 1,663 kWh | $317 |
| March | 6.08 m/s | 1,723 kWh | $328 |
| April | 6.30 m/s | 1,803 kWh | $343 |
| May | 5.74 m/s | 1,511 kWh | $288 |
| June | 5.29 m/s | 1,193 kWh | $227 |
| July | 4.85 m/s | 980 kWh | $187 |
| August | 4.90 m/s | 1,010 kWh | $192 |
| September | 5.59 m/s | 1,371 kWh | $261 |
| October | 5.92 m/s | 1,623 kWh | $309 |
| November | 5.86 m/s | 1,532 kWh | $292 |
| December | 5.78 m/s | 1,533 kWh | $292 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Price County averages 4.44 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.41 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.228, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 13,917 to 22,743 kWh a year, 63% 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 | 5.2 m/s | 13,917 kWh | 38 years |
| 30 m | 5.71 m/s | 17,530 kWh | 30 years |
| 40 m | 6.09 m/s | 20,386 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 6.41 m/s | 22,743 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Price County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Lincoln County, averages 6.15 m/s.
- Taylor County, WI: 5.99 m/s, 19,630 kWh, payback 27 years (33 mi)
- Lincoln County, WI: 6.15 m/s, 20,816 kWh, payback 25 years (39 mi)
- Oneida County, WI: 5.8 m/s, 18,226 kWh, payback 29 years (40 mi)
- Sawyer County, WI: 4.85 m/s, 11,537 kWh, payback 46 years (40 mi)
- Rusk County, WI: 5.19 m/s, 13,837 kWh, payback 38 years (40 mi)
- Iron County, WI: 4.5 m/s, 9,339 kWh, payback 56 years (45 mi)
Sun versus wind in Price County
Price County gets 3.74 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,092 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,749. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.6 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.