Wind Turbine Payback in Chaffee County, CO
Wind turbine payback in Chaffee 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 Chaffee County, CO averages 5.01 m/s (11.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 12,602 kWh a year, worth $2,117 at CO's 16.8¢/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 Chaffee County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Chaffee County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.4 m/s at the hub against 5.01 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,457 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,260, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 40¢/kWh, 2.4 times what CO pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.4 m/s instead of 5.01. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of CO
Chaffee County is the 1,449th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in CO is Baca County at 6.65 m/s, payback 24 years.
Month by month in Chaffee County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.00 m/s and about 1,619 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.22 m/s and 281 kWh, so the best month makes 5.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 57% of the year's output in Chaffee County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.73 m/s | 1,507 kWh | $253 |
| February | 6.03 m/s | 1,526 kWh | $256 |
| March | 5.78 m/s | 1,536 kWh | $258 |
| April | 6.00 m/s | 1,619 kWh | $272 |
| May | 4.96 m/s | 1,042 kWh | $175 |
| June | 4.53 m/s | 784 kWh | $132 |
| July | 3.22 m/s | 281 kWh | $47 |
| August | 3.31 m/s | 308 kWh | $52 |
| September | 4.07 m/s | 570 kWh | $96 |
| October | 5.15 m/s | 1,153 kWh | $194 |
| November | 5.53 m/s | 1,339 kWh | $225 |
| December | 5.86 m/s | 1,587 kWh | $267 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Chaffee County averages 4.09 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.5 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.184, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 10,236 to 16,037 kWh a year, 57% 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 | 4.65 m/s | 10,236 kWh | 58 years |
| 30 m | 5.01 m/s | 12,579 kWh | 47 years |
| 40 m | 5.28 m/s | 14,459 kWh | 41 years |
| 50 m | 5.5 m/s | 16,037 kWh | 37 years |
Counties around Chaffee County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Park County, averages 5.21 m/s.
- Lake County, CO: 5.03 m/s, 12,737 kWh, payback 47 years (33 mi)
- Park County, CO: 5.21 m/s, 13,976 kWh, payback 43 years (41 mi)
- Gunnison County, CO: 4.6 m/s, 9,947 kWh, payback 60 years (41 mi)
- Pitkin County, CO: 3.5 m/s, 4,329 kWh, payback over 100 years (47 mi)
- Saguache County, CO: 5.18 m/s, 13,768 kWh, payback 43 years (49 mi)
- Fremont County, CO: 4.87 m/s, 11,668 kWh, payback 51 years (51 mi)
Sun versus wind in Chaffee County
Chaffee County gets 4.99 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,457 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,260. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.2 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.