Wind Turbine Payback in Stark County, ND
Wind turbine payback in Stark 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 Stark County, ND averages 6.7 m/s (15 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 24,874 kWh a year, worth $3,099 at ND's 12.46¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 32 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Stark County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Stark County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 9.1 m/s at the hub against 6.7 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,194 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,487, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 20¢/kWh, 1.6 times what ND pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 9.1 m/s instead of 6.7. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of ND
Stark County is the 62nd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in ND is Bowman County at 6.79 m/s, payback 31 years.
Month by month in Stark County
January is the strongest month here, at 7.22 m/s and about 2,430 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.83 m/s and 1,568 kWh, so the best month makes 1.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 45% of the year's output in Stark County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 7.22 m/s | 2,430 kWh | $303 |
| February | 6.58 m/s | 1,841 kWh | $229 |
| March | 6.95 m/s | 2,267 kWh | $282 |
| April | 6.91 m/s | 2,167 kWh | $270 |
| May | 6.65 m/s | 2,083 kWh | $260 |
| June | 6.24 m/s | 1,765 kWh | $220 |
| July | 5.83 m/s | 1,568 kWh | $195 |
| August | 5.94 m/s | 1,636 kWh | $204 |
| September | 6.58 m/s | 1,973 kWh | $246 |
| October | 7.18 m/s | 2,408 kWh | $300 |
| November | 7.18 m/s | 2,331 kWh | $290 |
| December | 7.07 m/s | 2,338 kWh | $291 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Stark County averages 5.36 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.43 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.203, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 20,957 to 30,058 kWh a year, 43% 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 | 6.17 m/s | 20,957 kWh | 38 years |
| 30 m | 6.7 m/s | 24,861 kWh | 32 years |
| 40 m | 7.1 m/s | 27,762 kWh | 29 years |
| 50 m | 7.43 m/s | 30,058 kWh | 27 years |
Counties around Stark County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Hettinger County, averages 6.78 m/s.
- Hettinger County, ND: 6.78 m/s, 25,457 kWh, payback 32 years (28 mi)
- Billings County, ND: 6.76 m/s, 25,311 kWh, payback 32 years (36 mi)
- Dunn County, ND: 6.57 m/s, 23,922 kWh, payback 34 years (37 mi)
- Slope County, ND: 6.78 m/s, 25,457 kWh, payback 32 years (46 mi)
- Adams County, ND: 6.73 m/s, 25,093 kWh, payback 32 years (50 mi)
- Mercer County, ND: 6.52 m/s, 23,554 kWh, payback 34 years (52 mi)
Sun versus wind in Stark County
Stark County gets 4.09 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,194 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,487. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 2.1 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.