Wind Turbine Payback in York County, NE
Wind turbine payback in York 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 York County, NE averages 6.51 m/s (14.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 23,481 kWh a year, worth $3,034 at NE's 12.92¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 33 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in York County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in York County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.8 m/s at the hub against 6.51 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,285 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,348, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 21¢/kWh, 1.6 times what NE pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.8 m/s instead of 6.51. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NE
York County is the 193rd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NE is Cherry County at 6.83 m/s, payback 30 years.
Month by month in York County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.43 m/s and about 2,470 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.33 m/s and 1,256 kWh, so the best month makes 2.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 45% of the year's output in York County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.72 m/s | 2,126 kWh | $275 |
| February | 6.74 m/s | 1,930 kWh | $249 |
| March | 7.03 m/s | 2,313 kWh | $299 |
| April | 7.43 m/s | 2,470 kWh | $319 |
| May | 6.73 m/s | 2,132 kWh | $275 |
| June | 6.24 m/s | 1,765 kWh | $228 |
| July | 5.36 m/s | 1,278 kWh | $165 |
| August | 5.33 m/s | 1,256 kWh | $162 |
| September | 6.43 m/s | 1,879 kWh | $243 |
| October | 6.78 m/s | 2,165 kWh | $280 |
| November | 6.87 m/s | 2,143 kWh | $277 |
| December | 6.62 m/s | 2,065 kWh | $267 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in York County averages 5.13 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.28 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.217, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 19,462 to 29,020 kWh a year, 49% 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 | 5.97 m/s | 19,462 kWh | 40 years |
| 30 m | 6.52 m/s | 23,526 kWh | 33 years |
| 40 m | 6.94 m/s | 26,583 kWh | 29 years |
| 50 m | 7.28 m/s | 29,020 kWh | 27 years |
Counties around York County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Clay County, averages 6.55 m/s.
- Polk County, NE: 6.51 m/s, 23,481 kWh, payback 33 years (22 mi)
- Hamilton County, NE: 6.51 m/s, 23,481 kWh, payback 33 years (22 mi)
- Seward County, NE: 6.41 m/s, 22,743 kWh, payback 34 years (24 mi)
- Fillmore County, NE: 6.51 m/s, 23,481 kWh, payback 33 years (24 mi)
- Merrick County, NE: 6.51 m/s, 23,481 kWh, payback 33 years (31 mi)
- Clay County, NE: 6.55 m/s, 23,775 kWh, payback 33 years (34 mi)
Sun versus wind in York County
York County gets 4.4 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,285 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,348. 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.