Wind Turbine Payback in Carbon County, UT
Wind turbine payback in Carbon 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 Carbon County, UT averages 4.73 m/s (10.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 10,762 kWh a year, worth $1,419 at UT's 13.19¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 70 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Carbon County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Carbon County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.7 m/s at the hub against 4.73 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,478 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,076, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 46¢/kWh, 3.5 times what UT pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.7 m/s instead of 4.73. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of UT
Carbon County is the 1,596th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in UT is Daggett County at 5.32 m/s, payback 51 years.
Month by month in Carbon County
April is the strongest month here, at 5.61 m/s and about 1,381 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.90 m/s and 516 kWh, so the best month makes 2.7 times the worst. November to March brings in 44% of the year's output in Carbon County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.77 m/s | 936 kWh | $123 |
| February | 5.13 m/s | 1,029 kWh | $136 |
| March | 5.23 m/s | 1,198 kWh | $158 |
| April | 5.61 m/s | 1,381 kWh | $182 |
| May | 4.98 m/s | 1,051 kWh | $139 |
| June | 5.12 m/s | 1,098 kWh | $145 |
| July | 3.97 m/s | 546 kWh | $72 |
| August | 3.90 m/s | 516 kWh | $68 |
| September | 4.37 m/s | 707 kWh | $93 |
| October | 4.71 m/s | 902 kWh | $119 |
| November | 4.52 m/s | 777 kWh | $102 |
| December | 4.59 m/s | 840 kWh | $111 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Carbon County averages 3.76 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.27 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 8,446 to 14,397 kWh a year, 70% 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 | 4.35 m/s | 8,446 kWh | 90 years |
| 30 m | 4.73 m/s | 10,787 kWh | 70 years |
| 40 m | 5.03 m/s | 12,729 kWh | 60 years |
| 50 m | 5.27 m/s | 14,397 kWh | 53 years |
Counties around Carbon County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Carbon County.
- Duchesne County, UT: 3.72 m/s, 5,253 kWh, payback over 100 years (43 mi)
- Emery County, UT: 4.5 m/s, 9,339 kWh, payback 81 years (46 mi)
- Wasatch County, UT: 3.18 m/s, 3,165 kWh, payback over 100 years (55 mi)
- Sanpete County, UT: 3.92 m/s, 6,182 kWh, payback over 100 years (57 mi)
- Uintah County, UT: 4.38 m/s, 8,632 kWh, payback 88 years (65 mi)
- Utah County, UT: 3.6 m/s, 4,736 kWh, payback over 100 years (65 mi)
Sun versus wind in Carbon County
Carbon County gets 5.06 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,478 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,076. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.4 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.