Wind Turbine Payback in Cheyenne County, KS
Wind turbine payback in Cheyenne 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 Cheyenne County, KS averages 6.15 m/s (13.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 20,816 kWh a year, worth $3,177 at KS's 15.26¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 32 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Cheyenne County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Cheyenne County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 6.15 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,402 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,082, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 24¢/kWh, 1.6 times what KS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 6.15. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of KS
Cheyenne County is the 638th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in KS is Edwards County at 6.68 m/s, payback 27 years.
Month by month in Cheyenne County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.80 m/s and about 2,106 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.43 m/s and 1,318 kWh, so the best month makes 1.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 44% of the year's output in Cheyenne County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.29 m/s | 1,859 kWh | $284 |
| February | 6.30 m/s | 1,684 kWh | $257 |
| March | 6.51 m/s | 1,993 kWh | $304 |
| April | 6.80 m/s | 2,106 kWh | $321 |
| May | 6.20 m/s | 1,797 kWh | $274 |
| June | 5.88 m/s | 1,549 kWh | $236 |
| July | 5.46 m/s | 1,340 kWh | $204 |
| August | 5.43 m/s | 1,318 kWh | $201 |
| September | 6.03 m/s | 1,636 kWh | $250 |
| October | 6.33 m/s | 1,881 kWh | $287 |
| November | 6.38 m/s | 1,853 kWh | $283 |
| December | 6.27 m/s | 1,842 kWh | $281 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Cheyenne County averages 4.82 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.89 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.222, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 16,921 to 26,253 kWh a year, 55% 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 | 5.62 m/s | 16,921 kWh | 39 years |
| 30 m | 6.15 m/s | 20,826 kWh | 32 years |
| 40 m | 6.56 m/s | 23,827 kWh | 28 years |
| 50 m | 6.89 m/s | 26,253 kWh | 25 years |
Counties around Cheyenne County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Thomas County, averages 6.38 m/s.
- Dundy County, NE: 6.15 m/s, 20,816 kWh, payback 37 years (27 mi)
- Sherman County, KS: 6.28 m/s, 21,781 kWh, payback 30 years (30 mi)
- Rawlins County, KS: 6.24 m/s, 21,484 kWh, payback 31 years (35 mi)
- Yuma County, CO: 6.12 m/s, 20,594 kWh, payback 29 years (40 mi)
- Hitchcock County, NE: 6.24 m/s, 21,484 kWh, payback 36 years (45 mi)
- Thomas County, KS: 6.38 m/s, 22,521 kWh, payback 29 years (45 mi)
Sun versus wind in Cheyenne County
Cheyenne County gets 4.8 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,402 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,082. 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.