Wind Turbine Payback in Tuscola County, MI
Wind turbine payback in Tuscola 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 Tuscola County, MI averages 6.5 m/s (14.5 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 23,407 kWh a year, worth $5,086 at MI's 21.73¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 20 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Tuscola 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 1,080 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,341, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power already costs enough here: break-even is 21¢/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
Tuscola County is the 208th 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 Tuscola County
January is the strongest month here, at 7.39 m/s and about 2,527 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.11 m/s and 1,128 kWh, so the best month makes 2.2 times the worst. November to March brings in 51% of the year's output in Tuscola County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 7.39 m/s | 2,527 kWh | $549 |
| February | 7.31 m/s | 2,244 kWh | $488 |
| March | 6.93 m/s | 2,251 kWh | $489 |
| April | 7.14 m/s | 2,306 kWh | $501 |
| May | 6.16 m/s | 1,773 kWh | $385 |
| June | 5.53 m/s | 1,333 kWh | $290 |
| July | 5.11 m/s | 1,128 kWh | $245 |
| August | 5.20 m/s | 1,181 kWh | $257 |
| September | 5.82 m/s | 1,512 kWh | $329 |
| October | 6.98 m/s | 2,284 kWh | $496 |
| November | 7.28 m/s | 2,384 kWh | $518 |
| December | 7.28 m/s | 2,463 kWh | $535 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Tuscola County averages 5.22 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.2 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.200, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 19,662 to 28,461 kWh a year, 45% 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 | 5.99 m/s | 19,662 kWh | 23 years |
| 30 m | 6.5 m/s | 23,412 kWh | 20 years |
| 40 m | 6.89 m/s | 26,222 kWh | 18 years |
| 50 m | 7.2 m/s | 28,461 kWh | 16 years |
Counties around Tuscola County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Sanilac County, averages 7.01 m/s.
- Lapeer County, MI: 6.23 m/s, 21,410 kWh, payback 22 years (30 mi)
- Bay County, MI: 6.17 m/s, 20,965 kWh, payback 22 years (31 mi)
- Saginaw County, MI: 6.17 m/s, 20,965 kWh, payback 22 years (33 mi)
- Genesee County, MI: 6.13 m/s, 20,668 kWh, payback 22 years (35 mi)
- Sanilac County, MI: 7.01 m/s, 27,114 kWh, payback 17 years (40 mi)
- Arenac County, MI: 6.06 m/s, 20,149 kWh, payback 23 years (41 mi)
Sun versus wind in Tuscola County
Tuscola County gets 3.7 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,080 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,341. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 2.2 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.