Yup if you really need to be off grid in a climate that has cold, cloudy, snowy winters, you’re probably going to need a generator that runs on fossil fuels. For everyone else, use the grid.
We don’t have a permanent stream, but we do have enough intermittent flow in the winter to keep a 55,000L tank full. So our install entailed building a huge tank, a filtration system for water ingress (as it’s also our potable water supply, and a firefighting reserve in summer), digging 400m of trench over nightmare terrain with 70m of vertical drop, crossing a road twice, burying 90mm HDPE water line, fibre and 4x25mm2 power (latter two not necessary for hydropower but useful to have, and if I’ve got a trench open I’m putting everything in it at once) - and then building a hydro shed, installing the turbine, connecting it to our grid via a grid tie inverter, configuring our grid to accept power from it, setting up automations to turn it off and on depending on power demand and the level in the tank, and of course all sorts of side quests to achieve the above.
It has been neither cheap (about €12,000) nor easy (perhaps six weeks of full days for me, if added up over the year it took), but it has given us enough extra power in the winter that the petrol generator is now under a pile of crap in the shed, getting dusty.
This seems like a $50000 bit of work. Will it ever pay off or was it more of a hobby project?
Reportedly, even the fairy stout wind turbines they use up there have short, brutal lives. I heard the story of a croo that had to lasso/tangle/jam the blades of theirs in a storm because it lost the ability to control its speed and the alternative was letting it overspeed and possibly tear itself apart. They aren't large in diameter, but at the speeds they turn even in normal conditions up there, catastrophic failure could be really bad.
It's uncommon for a reason. Wind generator capacity rises with the square of the rotor diameter. That means small-ish generators (let's say "small enough to be roof mountable without additional mechanical supports") are significantly below 1 kW of power. Seriously, the systems people by for their sailing yachts make around 50W from a nice breeze - enough for lights and to trickle charge the battery while docked, not nearly enough for a fridge.
Combine that with quite a number of moving parts, changing loads and exposure to weather, you get very short maintenance intervals and final lifetimes.
If you have any other option for power, its almost always economical to just use that.
It's not adding to that cycle by reaching down into the depths of the earths crust to bring up carbon captured and sealed away for longer than human existence .. you know, that additional carbon that is referred to when increased carbon footprints are seriously talked about.
Particle emissions isn't what I responded to .. in terms of carbon and greenhouse gases what matters more is trees not being replaced.
In the course of, say, plantation growing timber for lumber generates sufficient burnable wood for landowners and a wider community - the final lumber trees are the ones that weren't weeded out earlier (and burnt) and have been routinely lopped of branches (more burnable wood) to minimize knots, etc.
Forrest management is a thing, timber for lumber, coppicing for regrowth, et al has been going on for several thousand years and has been part of traditional surface carbon cycle.
As has large scale grassland (and forest undercover) burning off for fire management.
It's so obviously better to reduce your need for heating and cooling than it is to increase your panel. battery, and HVAC size.
I've just setup electrical heating for my bedroom (HA PID sensor). Uses about 450KWh - $90 NZD worth of grid power per winter. Heat pump would take 20+ years to pay itself. Double glazing probably 30-40 years.
To make same amount of solar power per year I need a single $130 NZD panel.
2025 Code minimum is pretty decent if it's actually complied with, and 'net zero' middle ground with triple glazing is a worthwhile upgrade.