Wind Turbine Payback in Union County, OR
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, OR averages 4.23 m/s (9.5 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 7,787 kWh a year, worth $1,204 at OR's 15.46¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 83 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, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.23 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,194 kWh a year here against the turbine's 779, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 64¢/kWh, 4.2 times what OR pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.23. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OR
Union County is the 1,926th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in OR is Gilliam County at 5.48 m/s, payback 41 years.
Month by month in Union County
January is the strongest month here, at 5.52 m/s and about 1,377 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.26 m/s and 293 kWh, so the best month makes 4.7 times the worst. November to March brings in 66% of the year's output in Union County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.52 m/s | 1,377 kWh | $213 |
| February | 4.93 m/s | 924 kWh | $143 |
| March | 4.64 m/s | 868 kWh | $134 |
| April | 4.12 m/s | 590 kWh | $91 |
| May | 3.56 m/s | 389 kWh | $60 |
| June | 3.49 m/s | 353 kWh | $55 |
| July | 3.26 m/s | 293 kWh | $45 |
| August | 3.27 m/s | 295 kWh | $46 |
| September | 3.43 m/s | 334 kWh | $52 |
| October | 4.12 m/s | 610 kWh | $94 |
| November | 5.10 m/s | 1,087 kWh | $168 |
| December | 5.37 m/s | 1,286 kWh | $199 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Union County averages 3.21 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.81 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.251, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 5,715 to 11,276 kWh a year, 97% 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 | 3.82 m/s | 5,715 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.23 m/s | 7,794 kWh | 83 years |
| 40 m | 4.55 m/s | 9,628 kWh | 67 years |
| 50 m | 4.81 m/s | 11,276 kWh | 57 years |
Counties around Union County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Columbia County, averages 5.18 m/s.
- Umatilla County, OR: 5.02 m/s, 12,670 kWh, payback 51 years (41 mi)
- Baker County, OR: 3.78 m/s, 5,523 kWh, payback over 100 years (44 mi)
- Wallowa County, OR: 3.38 m/s, 3,868 kWh, payback over 100 years (44 mi)
- Columbia County, WA: 5.18 m/s, 13,768 kWh, payback 50 years (68 mi)
- Walla Walla County, WA: 4.61 m/s, 10,008 kWh, payback 69 years (70 mi)
- Asotin County, WA: 3.69 m/s, 5,121 kWh, payback over 100 years (71 mi)
Sun versus wind in Union County
Union 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 779. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.5 times as much here as the turbine. 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.