Wind Turbine Payback in Rockland County, NY
Wind turbine payback in Rockland 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 Rockland County, NY averages 4.5 m/s (10.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 9,339 kWh a year, worth $2,733 at NY's 29.26¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 37 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Rockland County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Rockland County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 5.6 m/s at the hub against 4.5 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,101 kWh a year here against the turbine's 934, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 54¢/kWh, 1.8 times what NY pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 5.6 m/s instead of 4.5. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NY
Rockland County is the 1,743rd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NY is Niagara County at 6.87 m/s, payback 13 years.
Month by month in Rockland County
March is the strongest month here, at 5.29 m/s and about 1,234 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.53 m/s and 377 kWh, so the best month makes 3.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 58% of the year's output in Rockland County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.24 m/s | 1,203 kWh | $352 |
| February | 5.39 m/s | 1,170 kWh | $342 |
| March | 5.29 m/s | 1,234 kWh | $361 |
| April | 4.81 m/s | 927 kWh | $271 |
| May | 4.10 m/s | 603 kWh | $176 |
| June | 3.75 m/s | 443 kWh | $130 |
| July | 3.60 m/s | 401 kWh | $117 |
| August | 3.53 m/s | 377 kWh | $110 |
| September | 3.91 m/s | 505 kWh | $148 |
| October | 4.56 m/s | 825 kWh | $241 |
| November | 4.80 m/s | 922 kWh | $270 |
| December | 5.07 m/s | 1,103 kWh | $323 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Rockland County averages 3.21 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.27 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.308, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 6,448 to 14,397 kWh a year, 123% 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 | 3.97 m/s | 6,448 kWh | 53 years |
| 30 m | 4.5 m/s | 9,355 kWh | 37 years |
| 40 m | 4.92 m/s | 11,999 kWh | 29 years |
| 50 m | 5.27 m/s | 14,397 kWh | 24 years |
Counties around Rockland County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Rockland County.
- Bergen County, NJ: 3.66 m/s, 4,991 kWh, payback 83 years (14 mi)
- Westchester County, NY: 4.5 m/s, 9,339 kWh, payback 37 years (15 mi)
- Passaic County, NJ: 3.66 m/s, 4,991 kWh, payback 83 years (16 mi)
- Orange County, NY: 3.47 m/s, 4,211 kWh, payback 81 years (23 mi)
- Bronx County, NY: 4.5 m/s, 9,339 kWh, payback 37 years (23 mi)
- Putnam County, NY: 3.47 m/s, 4,211 kWh, payback 81 years (24 mi)
Sun versus wind in Rockland County
Rockland County gets 3.77 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,101 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 934. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.2 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.