Wind Turbine Payback in Sanilac County, MI
Wind turbine payback in Sanilac 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 Sanilac County, MI averages 7.01 m/s (15.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 27,114 kWh a year, worth $5,892 at MI's 21.73¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 17 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Sanilac 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 6.4 m/s pays back in time. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,045 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,711, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power already costs enough here: break-even is 18¢/kWh and MI pays 21.73¢.
- The wind clears the break-even speed of 6.4 m/s at today's price.
Against the rest of MI
Sanilac County is the 17th 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 Sanilac County
December is the strongest month here, at 8.19 m/s and about 2,973 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.31 m/s and 1,246 kWh, so the best month makes 2.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 52% of the year's output in Sanilac County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 8.18 m/s | 2,968 kWh | $645 |
| February | 7.91 m/s | 2,550 kWh | $554 |
| March | 7.40 m/s | 2,534 kWh | $551 |
| April | 7.57 m/s | 2,551 kWh | $554 |
| May | 6.47 m/s | 1,969 kWh | $428 |
| June | 5.77 m/s | 1,482 kWh | $322 |
| July | 5.31 m/s | 1,246 kWh | $271 |
| August | 5.47 m/s | 1,342 kWh | $292 |
| September | 6.21 m/s | 1,747 kWh | $380 |
| October | 7.64 m/s | 2,673 kWh | $581 |
| November | 8.09 m/s | 2,829 kWh | $615 |
| December | 8.19 m/s | 2,973 kWh | $646 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Sanilac County averages 5.97 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.55 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.146, typical of very open, smooth ground where height adds little. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 24,176 to 30,875 kWh a year, 28% 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 | 6.6 m/s | 24,176 kWh | 19 years |
| 30 m | 7.01 m/s | 27,096 kWh | 17 years |
| 40 m | 7.31 m/s | 29,215 kWh | 16 years |
| 50 m | 7.55 m/s | 30,875 kWh | 15 years |
Counties around Sanilac County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Sanilac County.
- Huron County, MI: 6.85 m/s, 25,964 kWh, payback 18 years (33 mi)
- St. Clair County, MI: 6.42 m/s, 22,817 kWh, payback 20 years (36 mi)
- Lapeer County, MI: 6.23 m/s, 21,410 kWh, payback 22 years (38 mi)
- Tuscola County, MI: 6.5 m/s, 23,407 kWh, payback 20 years (40 mi)
- Macomb County, MI: 6.17 m/s, 20,965 kWh, payback 22 years (55 mi)
- Genesee County, MI: 6.13 m/s, 20,668 kWh, payback 22 years (61 mi)
Sun versus wind in Sanilac County
Sanilac County gets 3.58 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,045 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,711. 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.