Wind Turbine Payback in Wheeler County, OR
Wind turbine payback in Wheeler 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 Wheeler County, OR averages 4.53 m/s (10.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 9,519 kWh a year, worth $1,472 at OR's 15.46¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 68 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Wheeler County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Wheeler County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.53 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,279 kWh a year here against the turbine's 952, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 53¢/kWh, 3.4 times what OR pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.53. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OR
Wheeler County is the 1,731st 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 Wheeler County
January is the strongest month here, at 5.74 m/s and about 1,509 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.37 m/s and 326 kWh, so the best month makes 4.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 64% of the year's output in Wheeler County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.74 m/s | 1,509 kWh | $233 |
| February | 5.21 m/s | 1,071 kWh | $166 |
| March | 5.08 m/s | 1,112 kWh | $172 |
| April | 4.51 m/s | 772 kWh | $119 |
| May | 4.03 m/s | 573 kWh | $89 |
| June | 3.86 m/s | 486 kWh | $75 |
| July | 3.41 m/s | 337 kWh | $52 |
| August | 3.37 m/s | 326 kWh | $50 |
| September | 3.60 m/s | 391 kWh | $60 |
| October | 4.44 m/s | 762 kWh | $118 |
| November | 5.43 m/s | 1,278 kWh | $198 |
| December | 5.70 m/s | 1,486 kWh | $230 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Wheeler County averages 3.58 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.05 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.214, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 7,359 to 12,873 kWh a year, 75% 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 | 4.15 m/s | 7,359 kWh | 88 years |
| 30 m | 4.53 m/s | 9,502 kWh | 68 years |
| 40 m | 4.81 m/s | 11,306 kWh | 57 years |
| 50 m | 5.05 m/s | 12,873 kWh | 50 years |
Counties around Wheeler County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Gilliam County, averages 5.48 m/s.
- Crook County, OR: 4.99 m/s, 12,467 kWh, payback 52 years (43 mi)
- Gilliam County, OR: 5.48 m/s, 15,893 kWh, payback 41 years (46 mi)
- Morrow County, OR: 5.25 m/s, 14,256 kWh, payback 45 years (52 mi)
- Grant County, OR: 3.34 m/s, 3,720 kWh, payback over 100 years (53 mi)
- Sherman County, OR: 4.8 m/s, 11,212 kWh, payback 58 years (56 mi)
- Jefferson County, OR: 3.93 m/s, 6,231 kWh, payback over 100 years (57 mi)
Sun versus wind in Wheeler County
Wheeler County gets 4.38 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,279 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 952. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.3 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.