Wind Turbine Payback in York County, PA
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, PA averages 4.25 m/s (9.5 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 7,897 kWh a year, worth $1,669 at PA's 21.13¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 60 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, 6.5 m/s at the hub against 4.25 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,180 kWh a year here against the turbine's 790, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 63¢/kWh, 3.0 times what PA pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.5 m/s instead of 4.25. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of PA
York County is the 1,914th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in PA is Philadelphia County at 4.74 m/s, payback 44 years.
Month by month in York County
March is the strongest month here, at 5.06 m/s and about 1,097 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.20 m/s and 274 kWh, so the best month makes 4.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 59% of the year's output in York County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.02 m/s | 1,077 kWh | $228 |
| February | 5.14 m/s | 1,035 kWh | $219 |
| March | 5.06 m/s | 1,097 kWh | $232 |
| April | 4.80 m/s | 923 kWh | $195 |
| May | 3.98 m/s | 552 kWh | $117 |
| June | 3.63 m/s | 399 kWh | $84 |
| July | 3.29 m/s | 301 kWh | $64 |
| August | 3.20 m/s | 274 kWh | $58 |
| September | 3.56 m/s | 376 kWh | $79 |
| October | 4.14 m/s | 622 kWh | $131 |
| November | 4.48 m/s | 759 kWh | $160 |
| December | 4.72 m/s | 908 kWh | $192 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in York County averages 2.95 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.03 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.332, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 5,211 to 12,737 kWh a year, 144% 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 | 3.71 m/s | 5,211 kWh | 91 years |
| 30 m | 4.25 m/s | 7,872 kWh | 60 years |
| 40 m | 4.67 m/s | 10,388 kWh | 46 years |
| 50 m | 5.03 m/s | 12,737 kWh | 37 years |
Counties around York County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Carroll County, averages 5.26 m/s.
- Adams County, PA: 3.99 m/s, 6,527 kWh, payback 73 years (26 mi)
- Lancaster County, PA: 4.14 m/s, 7,301 kWh, payback 65 years (27 mi)
- Carroll County, MD: 5.26 m/s, 14,327 kWh, payback 33 years (29 mi)
- Cumberland County, PA: 3.99 m/s, 6,527 kWh, payback 73 years (33 mi)
- Baltimore County, MD: 5.26 m/s, 14,327 kWh, payback 33 years (34 mi)
- Lebanon County, PA: 3.6 m/s, 4,736 kWh, payback 100 years (34 mi)
Sun versus wind in York County
York County gets 4.04 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,180 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 790. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.5 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.