Wind Turbine Payback in Richland County, IL
Wind turbine payback in Richland 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 Richland County, IL averages 5.61 m/s (12.5 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 16,834 kWh a year, worth $3,237 at IL's 19.23¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 31 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Richland County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Richland County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.8 m/s at the hub against 5.61 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,215 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,683, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 30¢/kWh, 1.5 times what IL pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.8 m/s instead of 5.61. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of IL
Richland County is the 1,161st windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in IL is Cook County at 6.73 m/s, payback 21 years.
Month by month in Richland County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.63 m/s and about 2,004 kWh. July is the weakest, 4.15 m/s and 626 kWh, so the best month makes 3.2 times the worst. November to March brings in 53% of the year's output in Richland County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.36 m/s | 1,899 kWh | $365 |
| February | 6.31 m/s | 1,690 kWh | $325 |
| March | 6.48 m/s | 1,977 kWh | $380 |
| April | 6.63 m/s | 2,004 kWh | $385 |
| May | 5.63 m/s | 1,440 kWh | $277 |
| June | 4.80 m/s | 920 kWh | $177 |
| July | 4.15 m/s | 626 kWh | $120 |
| August | 4.16 m/s | 630 kWh | $121 |
| September | 4.67 m/s | 855 kWh | $164 |
| October | 5.79 m/s | 1,544 kWh | $297 |
| November | 6.23 m/s | 1,757 kWh | $338 |
| December | 6.12 m/s | 1,749 kWh | $336 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Richland County averages 4.28 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.36 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.246, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 13,054 to 22,373 kWh a year, 71% 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 | 5.08 m/s | 13,054 kWh | 40 years |
| 30 m | 5.61 m/s | 16,827 kWh | 31 years |
| 40 m | 6.02 m/s | 19,854 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 6.36 m/s | 22,373 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Richland County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Jasper County, averages 5.73 m/s.
- Lawrence County, IL: 5.53 m/s, 16,254 kWh, payback 32 years (19 mi)
- Edwards County, IL: 5.61 m/s, 16,834 kWh, payback 31 years (20 mi)
- Jasper County, IL: 5.73 m/s, 17,712 kWh, payback 29 years (21 mi)
- Clay County, IL: 5.71 m/s, 17,565 kWh, payback 30 years (22 mi)
- Wabash County, IL: 5.61 m/s, 16,834 kWh, payback 31 years (23 mi)
- Crawford County, IL: 5.61 m/s, 16,834 kWh, payback 31 years (27 mi)
Sun versus wind in Richland County
Richland County gets 4.16 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,215 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,683. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.4 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.