Wind Turbine Payback in Wadena County, MN
Wind turbine payback in Wadena 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 Wadena 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 Wadena County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Wadena 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
Wadena 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 Wadena County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.99 m/s and about 2,218 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.52 m/s and 1,373 kWh, so the best month makes 1.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 44% of the year's output in Wadena County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.73 m/s | 2,132 kWh | $351 |
| February | 6.79 m/s | 1,956 kWh | $322 |
| March | 6.68 m/s | 2,099 kWh | $345 |
| April | 6.99 m/s | 2,218 kWh | $365 |
| May | 6.61 m/s | 2,060 kWh | $339 |
| June | 6.04 m/s | 1,644 kWh | $270 |
| July | 5.52 m/s | 1,373 kWh | $226 |
| August | 5.66 m/s | 1,462 kWh | $240 |
| September | 6.52 m/s | 1,939 kWh | $319 |
| October | 6.82 m/s | 2,188 kWh | $360 |
| November | 6.65 m/s | 2,015 kWh | $331 |
| December | 6.43 m/s | 1,942 kWh | $319 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Wadena County averages 5.13 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.18 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.209, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 19,176 to 28,320 kWh a year, 48% 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 | 19,176 kWh | 32 years |
| 30 m | 6.45 m/s | 23,060 kWh | 26 years |
| 40 m | 6.85 m/s | 25,985 kWh | 23 years |
| 50 m | 7.18 m/s | 28,320 kWh | 22 years |
Counties around Wadena County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Becker County, averages 6.62 m/s.
- Hubbard County, MN: 6.51 m/s, 23,481 kWh, payback 26 years (35 mi)
- Todd County, MN: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 26 years (36 mi)
- Otter Tail County, MN: 6.59 m/s, 24,069 kWh, payback 25 years (37 mi)
- Cass County, MN: 6.38 m/s, 22,521 kWh, payback 27 years (40 mi)
- Becker County, MN: 6.62 m/s, 24,289 kWh, payback 25 years (43 mi)
- Crow Wing County, MN: 6.41 m/s, 22,743 kWh, payback 27 years (44 mi)
Sun versus wind in Wadena County
Wadena 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.