Wind Turbine Payback in Ward County, ND
Wind turbine payback in Ward 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 Ward County, ND averages 6.49 m/s (14.5 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 23,333 kWh a year, worth $2,907 at ND's 12.46¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 34 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Ward County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Ward County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 9.1 m/s at the hub against 6.49 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,136 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,333, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 21¢/kWh, 1.7 times what ND pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 9.1 m/s instead of 6.49. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of ND
Ward County is the 219th 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 Ward County
October is the strongest month here, at 7.01 m/s and about 2,301 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.68 m/s and 1,475 kWh, so the best month makes 1.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 44% of the year's output in Ward County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.75 m/s | 2,141 kWh | $267 |
| February | 6.33 m/s | 1,700 kWh | $212 |
| March | 6.76 m/s | 2,152 kWh | $268 |
| April | 6.84 m/s | 2,125 kWh | $265 |
| May | 6.67 m/s | 2,096 kWh | $261 |
| June | 6.11 m/s | 1,690 kWh | $211 |
| July | 5.68 m/s | 1,475 kWh | $184 |
| August | 5.78 m/s | 1,537 kWh | $192 |
| September | 6.48 m/s | 1,909 kWh | $238 |
| October | 7.01 m/s | 2,301 kWh | $287 |
| November | 6.90 m/s | 2,163 kWh | $270 |
| December | 6.63 m/s | 2,068 kWh | $258 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Ward County averages 5.18 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.21 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.205, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 19,521 to 28,531 kWh a year, 46% 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 | 5.98 m/s | 19,521 kWh | 41 years |
| 30 m | 6.49 m/s | 23,357 kWh | 34 years |
| 40 m | 6.89 m/s | 26,236 kWh | 31 years |
| 50 m | 7.21 m/s | 28,531 kWh | 28 years |
Counties around Ward County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Mountrail County, averages 6.53 m/s.
- Renville County, ND: 6.51 m/s, 23,481 kWh, payback 34 years (35 mi)
- Mountrail County, ND: 6.53 m/s, 23,628 kWh, payback 34 years (38 mi)
- McLean County, ND: 6.52 m/s, 23,554 kWh, payback 34 years (39 mi)
- McHenry County, ND: 6.42 m/s, 22,817 kWh, payback 35 years (42 mi)
- Bottineau County, ND: 5.7 m/s, 17,492 kWh, payback 46 years (51 mi)
- Burke County, ND: 6.41 m/s, 22,743 kWh, payback 35 years (60 mi)
Sun versus wind in Ward County
Ward County gets 3.89 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,136 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,333. 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.