Wind Turbine Payback in Traill County, ND
Wind turbine payback in Traill 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 Traill County, ND averages 6.29 m/s (14.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,855 kWh a year, worth $2,723 at ND's 12.46¢/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 Traill County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Traill County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 9.1 m/s at the hub against 6.29 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,121 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,186, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 23¢/kWh, 1.8 times what ND pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 9.1 m/s instead of 6.29. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of ND
Traill County is the 482nd 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 Traill County
October is the strongest month here, at 6.79 m/s and about 2,170 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.52 m/s and 1,374 kWh, so the best month makes 1.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 42% of the year's output in Traill County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.27 m/s | 1,845 kWh | $230 |
| February | 6.26 m/s | 1,662 kWh | $207 |
| March | 6.54 m/s | 2,014 kWh | $251 |
| April | 6.81 m/s | 2,111 kWh | $263 |
| May | 6.64 m/s | 2,076 kWh | $259 |
| June | 6.02 m/s | 1,632 kWh | $203 |
| July | 5.52 m/s | 1,374 kWh | $171 |
| August | 5.62 m/s | 1,434 kWh | $179 |
| September | 6.43 m/s | 1,884 kWh | $235 |
| October | 6.79 m/s | 2,170 kWh | $270 |
| November | 6.49 m/s | 1,917 kWh | $239 |
| December | 6.15 m/s | 1,766 kWh | $220 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Traill County averages 4.98 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.01 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.212, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 18,023 to 27,114 kWh a year, 50% 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 | 5.77 m/s | 18,023 kWh | 45 years |
| 30 m | 6.29 m/s | 21,858 kWh | 37 years |
| 40 m | 6.69 m/s | 24,773 kWh | 32 years |
| 50 m | 7.01 m/s | 27,114 kWh | 30 years |
Counties around Traill County
6 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Clay County, averages 6.45 m/s.
- Steele County, ND: 6.41 m/s, 22,743 kWh, payback 35 years (26 mi)
- Norman County, MN: 6.37 m/s, 22,447 kWh, payback 27 years (34 mi)
- Grand Forks County, ND: 6.4 m/s, 22,669 kWh, payback 35 years (36 mi)
- Cass County, ND: 6.35 m/s, 22,299 kWh, payback 36 years (36 mi)
- Polk County, MN: 6.34 m/s, 22,225 kWh, payback 27 years (42 mi)
- Clay County, MN: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 26 years (49 mi)
Sun versus wind in Traill County
Traill County gets 3.84 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,121 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,186. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 2.0 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.