Wind Turbine Payback in Racine County, WI
Wind turbine payback in Racine County
Only just. The money comes back late in the turbine's life.
At 30 m, the height a home turbine tower usually reaches, the wind in Racine County, WI averages 7.19 m/s (16.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 28,390 kWh a year, worth $5,408 at WI's 19.05¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 19 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Racine County
It is close enough that your own site decides it. If you have open land with no trees or buildings upwind, ask an installer to log the wind at 30 m or higher; anything above 6.9 m/s pays back in time. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,072 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,839, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power already costs enough here: break-even is 18¢/kWh and WI pays 19.05¢.
- The wind clears the break-even speed of 6.9 m/s at today's price.
Against the rest of WI
Racine County is the 14th 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 Racine County
January is the strongest month here, at 8.25 m/s and about 3,008 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.42 m/s and 1,312 kWh, so the best month makes 2.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 50% of the year's output in Racine County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 8.25 m/s | 3,008 kWh | $573 |
| February | 8.04 m/s | 2,614 kWh | $498 |
| March | 7.53 m/s | 2,612 kWh | $498 |
| April | 7.82 m/s | 2,687 kWh | $512 |
| May | 7.12 m/s | 2,370 kWh | $451 |
| June | 6.22 m/s | 1,755 kWh | $334 |
| July | 5.52 m/s | 1,375 kWh | $262 |
| August | 5.42 m/s | 1,312 kWh | $250 |
| September | 6.50 m/s | 1,926 kWh | $367 |
| October | 7.69 m/s | 2,703 kWh | $515 |
| November | 8.14 m/s | 2,854 kWh | $544 |
| December | 8.10 m/s | 2,929 kWh | $558 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Racine County averages 6.23 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.68 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.130, typical of very open, smooth ground where height adds little. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 25,729 to 31,747 kWh a year, 23% 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 | 6.82 m/s | 25,729 kWh | 20 years |
| 30 m | 7.19 m/s | 28,366 kWh | 19 years |
| 40 m | 7.46 m/s | 30,266 kWh | 17 years |
| 50 m | 7.68 m/s | 31,747 kWh | 17 years |
Counties around Racine County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Racine County.
- Milwaukee County, WI: 6.28 m/s, 21,781 kWh, payback 24 years (10 mi)
- Kenosha County, WI: 6.25 m/s, 21,558 kWh, payback 24 years (14 mi)
- Waukesha County, WI: 6.28 m/s, 21,781 kWh, payback 24 years (32 mi)
- Walworth County, WI: 6.05 m/s, 20,075 kWh, payback 26 years (40 mi)
- Lake County, IL: 6.73 m/s, 25,093 kWh, payback 21 years (41 mi)
- McHenry County, IL: 6.05 m/s, 20,075 kWh, payback 26 years (47 mi)
Sun versus wind in Racine County
Racine County gets 3.67 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,072 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,839. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 2.6 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.