Wind Turbine Payback in Armstrong County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Armstrong 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 Armstrong County, TX averages 6.44 m/s (14.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 22,964 kWh a year, worth $3,681 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 27 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Armstrong County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Armstrong County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 6.44 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,545 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,296, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 22¢/kWh, 1.4 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 6.44. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Armstrong County is the 280th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in TX is Dallam County at 6.82 m/s, payback 24 years.
Month by month in Armstrong County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.39 m/s and about 2,451 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.46 m/s and 1,340 kWh, so the best month makes 1.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 44% of the year's output in Armstrong County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.48 m/s | 1,977 kWh | $317 |
| February | 6.66 m/s | 1,887 kWh | $302 |
| March | 6.88 m/s | 2,221 kWh | $356 |
| April | 7.39 m/s | 2,451 kWh | $393 |
| May | 6.61 m/s | 2,055 kWh | $329 |
| June | 6.50 m/s | 1,924 kWh | $308 |
| July | 5.70 m/s | 1,483 kWh | $238 |
| August | 5.46 m/s | 1,340 kWh | $215 |
| September | 5.87 m/s | 1,543 kWh | $247 |
| October | 6.45 m/s | 1,955 kWh | $313 |
| November | 6.72 m/s | 2,054 kWh | $329 |
| December | 6.56 m/s | 2,027 kWh | $325 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Armstrong County averages 5.06 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.2 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.219, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 18,897 to 28,461 kWh a year, 51% 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 | 5.89 m/s | 18,897 kWh | 33 years |
| 30 m | 6.44 m/s | 22,949 kWh | 27 years |
| 40 m | 6.86 m/s | 26,012 kWh | 24 years |
| 50 m | 7.2 m/s | 28,461 kWh | 22 years |
Counties around Armstrong County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Carson County, averages 6.7 m/s.
- Carson County, TX: 6.7 m/s, 24,874 kWh, payback 25 years (30 mi)
- Randall County, TX: 6.6 m/s, 24,142 kWh, payback 26 years (31 mi)
- Donley County, TX: 6.29 m/s, 21,855 kWh, payback 29 years (31 mi)
- Briscoe County, TX: 6.35 m/s, 22,299 kWh, payback 28 years (32 mi)
- Swisher County, TX: 6.48 m/s, 23,260 kWh, payback 27 years (37 mi)
- Potter County, TX: 6.55 m/s, 23,775 kWh, payback 26 years (43 mi)
Sun versus wind in Armstrong County
Armstrong County gets 5.29 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,545 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,296. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.5 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.