Wind Turbine Payback in Union County, IA
Wind turbine payback in Union 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 Union County, IA averages 6.22 m/s (13.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,336 kWh a year, worth $3,104 at IA's 14.55¢/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 Union County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Union County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.1 m/s at the hub against 6.22 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,206 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,134, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 23¢/kWh, 1.6 times what IA pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.1 m/s instead of 6.22. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of IA
Union County is the 566th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in IA is Dickinson County at 6.59 m/s, payback 29 years.
Month by month in Union County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.07 m/s and about 2,263 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.94 m/s and 1,030 kWh, so the best month makes 2.2 times the worst. November to March brings in 48% of the year's output in Union County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.63 m/s | 2,070 kWh | $301 |
| February | 6.62 m/s | 1,865 kWh | $271 |
| March | 6.86 m/s | 2,208 kWh | $321 |
| April | 7.07 m/s | 2,263 kWh | $329 |
| May | 6.33 m/s | 1,881 kWh | $274 |
| June | 5.69 m/s | 1,430 kWh | $208 |
| July | 4.98 m/s | 1,055 kWh | $154 |
| August | 4.94 m/s | 1,030 kWh | $150 |
| September | 5.93 m/s | 1,576 kWh | $229 |
| October | 6.50 m/s | 1,987 kWh | $289 |
| November | 6.72 m/s | 2,057 kWh | $299 |
| December | 6.48 m/s | 1,976 kWh | $288 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Union County averages 4.86 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.98 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.225, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 17,343 to 26,900 kWh a year, 55% 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 | 5.68 m/s | 17,343 kWh | 40 years |
| 30 m | 6.22 m/s | 21,352 kWh | 32 years |
| 40 m | 6.64 m/s | 24,422 kWh | 28 years |
| 50 m | 6.98 m/s | 26,900 kWh | 26 years |
Counties around Union County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Adair County, averages 6.29 m/s.
- Ringgold County, IA: 6.06 m/s, 20,149 kWh, payback 34 years (20 mi)
- Adams County, IA: 6.22 m/s, 21,336 kWh, payback 32 years (24 mi)
- Clarke County, IA: 6.16 m/s, 20,891 kWh, payback 33 years (24 mi)
- Adair County, IA: 6.29 m/s, 21,855 kWh, payback 31 years (24 mi)
- Madison County, IA: 6.14 m/s, 20,742 kWh, payback 33 years (24 mi)
- Taylor County, IA: 6.1 m/s, 20,446 kWh, payback 34 years (31 mi)
Sun versus wind in Union County
Union County gets 4.13 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,206 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,134. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.8 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.