Wind Turbine Payback in Todd County, MN
Wind turbine payback in Todd 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 Todd County, MN averages 6.45 m/s (14.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 23,038 kWh a year, worth $3,787 at MN's 16.44¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 26 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Todd County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Todd County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.5 m/s at the hub against 6.45 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,101 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,304, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 22¢/kWh, 1.3 times what MN pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.5 m/s instead of 6.45. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MN
Todd County is the 257th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MN is Lincoln County at 6.68 m/s, payback 25 years.
Month by month in Todd County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.04 m/s and about 2,247 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.47 m/s and 1,342 kWh, so the best month makes 1.7 times the worst. November to March brings in 44% of the year's output in Todd County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.69 m/s | 2,106 kWh | $346 |
| February | 6.75 m/s | 1,938 kWh | $319 |
| March | 6.70 m/s | 2,112 kWh | $347 |
| April | 7.04 m/s | 2,247 kWh | $369 |
| May | 6.66 m/s | 2,090 kWh | $344 |
| June | 6.03 m/s | 1,640 kWh | $270 |
| July | 5.47 m/s | 1,342 kWh | $221 |
| August | 5.58 m/s | 1,414 kWh | $232 |
| September | 6.52 m/s | 1,935 kWh | $318 |
| October | 6.84 m/s | 2,201 kWh | $362 |
| November | 6.66 m/s | 2,022 kWh | $332 |
| December | 6.45 m/s | 1,955 kWh | $321 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Todd County averages 5.13 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.17 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.208, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 19,155 to 28,250 kWh a year, 47% 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 | 5.93 m/s | 19,155 kWh | 32 years |
| 30 m | 6.45 m/s | 23,018 kWh | 26 years |
| 40 m | 6.84 m/s | 25,927 kWh | 24 years |
| 50 m | 7.17 m/s | 28,250 kWh | 22 years |
Counties around Todd County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Otter Tail County, averages 6.59 m/s.
- Douglas County, MN: 6.52 m/s, 23,554 kWh, payback 26 years (28 mi)
- Morrison County, MN: 6.34 m/s, 22,225 kWh, payback 27 years (31 mi)
- Wadena County, MN: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 26 years (36 mi)
- Stearns County, MN: 6.29 m/s, 21,855 kWh, payback 28 years (38 mi)
- Pope County, MN: 6.39 m/s, 22,595 kWh, payback 27 years (42 mi)
- Otter Tail County, MN: 6.59 m/s, 24,069 kWh, payback 25 years (45 mi)
Sun versus wind in Todd County
Todd 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 2,304. 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.