Wind Turbine Payback in Brewster County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Brewster 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 Brewster County, TX averages 5.11 m/s (11.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 13,284 kWh a year, worth $2,129 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 47 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Brewster County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Brewster County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 5.11 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,676 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,328, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 38¢/kWh, 2.3 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 5.11. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Brewster County is the 1,407th 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 Brewster County
April is the strongest month here, at 5.77 m/s and about 1,478 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.44 m/s and 762 kWh, so the best month makes 1.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 47% of the year's output in Brewster County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.34 m/s | 1,262 kWh | $202 |
| February | 5.62 m/s | 1,299 kWh | $208 |
| March | 5.60 m/s | 1,421 kWh | $228 |
| April | 5.77 m/s | 1,478 kWh | $237 |
| May | 5.26 m/s | 1,219 kWh | $195 |
| June | 4.82 m/s | 934 kWh | $150 |
| July | 4.71 m/s | 902 kWh | $145 |
| August | 4.44 m/s | 762 kWh | $122 |
| September | 4.55 m/s | 795 kWh | $127 |
| October | 4.84 m/s | 975 kWh | $156 |
| November | 5.08 m/s | 1,077 kWh | $173 |
| December | 5.31 m/s | 1,246 kWh | $200 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Brewster County averages 4.06 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.69 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.210, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 10,534 to 17,419 kWh a year, 65% 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 | 4.69 m/s | 10,534 kWh | 59 years |
| 30 m | 5.11 m/s | 13,292 kWh | 47 years |
| 40 m | 5.43 m/s | 15,530 kWh | 40 years |
| 50 m | 5.69 m/s | 17,419 kWh | 36 years |
Counties around Brewster County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Pecos County, averages 6.32 m/s.
- Presidio County, TX: 4.72 m/s, 10,698 kWh, payback 58 years (62 mi)
- Pecos County, TX: 6.32 m/s, 22,077 kWh, payback 28 years (74 mi)
- Terrell County, TX: 5.56 m/s, 16,471 kWh, payback 38 years (76 mi)
- Jeff Davis County, TX: 5.26 m/s, 14,327 kWh, payback 44 years (80 mi)
- Reeves County, TX: 5.48 m/s, 15,893 kWh, payback 39 years (107 mi)
- Ward County, TX: 5.53 m/s, 16,254 kWh, payback 38 years (118 mi)
Sun versus wind in Brewster County
Brewster County gets 5.74 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,676 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,328. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.3 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.