Wind Turbine Payback in Winona County, MN
Wind turbine payback in Winona 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 Winona County, MN averages 6.17 m/s (13.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 20,965 kWh a year, worth $3,447 at MN's 16.44¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 29 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Winona County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Winona County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.5 m/s at the hub against 6.17 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,136 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,097, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 24¢/kWh, 1.5 times what MN pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.5 m/s instead of 6.17. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MN
Winona County is the 608th 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 Winona County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.85 m/s and about 2,136 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.02 m/s and 1,075 kWh, so the best month makes 2.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 47% of the year's output in Winona County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.72 m/s | 2,124 kWh | $349 |
| February | 6.77 m/s | 1,949 kWh | $320 |
| March | 6.58 m/s | 2,041 kWh | $336 |
| April | 6.85 m/s | 2,136 kWh | $351 |
| May | 6.22 m/s | 1,811 kWh | $298 |
| June | 5.65 m/s | 1,405 kWh | $231 |
| July | 5.05 m/s | 1,096 kWh | $180 |
| August | 5.02 m/s | 1,075 kWh | $177 |
| September | 5.96 m/s | 1,594 kWh | $262 |
| October | 6.45 m/s | 1,957 kWh | $322 |
| November | 6.50 m/s | 1,926 kWh | $317 |
| December | 6.32 m/s | 1,878 kWh | $309 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Winona County averages 4.86 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.9 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.218, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 17,131 to 26,325 kWh a year, 54% 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 | 5.65 m/s | 17,131 kWh | 36 years |
| 30 m | 6.17 m/s | 20,986 kWh | 29 years |
| 40 m | 6.57 m/s | 23,940 kWh | 25 years |
| 50 m | 6.9 m/s | 26,325 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Winona County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Olmsted County, averages 6.37 m/s.
- Houston County, MN: 6.09 m/s, 20,371 kWh, payback 30 years (26 mi)
- Fillmore County, MN: 6.22 m/s, 21,336 kWh, payback 29 years (26 mi)
- Buffalo County, WI: 6.03 m/s, 19,926 kWh, payback 26 years (28 mi)
- Trempealeau County, WI: 6 m/s, 19,704 kWh, payback 27 years (30 mi)
- Wabasha County, MN: 6.14 m/s, 20,742 kWh, payback 29 years (31 mi)
- Olmsted County, MN: 6.37 m/s, 22,447 kWh, payback 27 years (31 mi)
Sun versus wind in Winona County
Winona 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 2,097. 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.