Wind Turbine Payback in Choctaw County, OK
Wind turbine payback in Choctaw 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 Choctaw County, OK averages 4.06 m/s (9.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 6,883 kWh a year, worth $950 at OK's 13.81¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of over 100 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Choctaw County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Choctaw County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.4 m/s at the hub against 4.06 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,314 kWh a year here against the turbine's 688, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 73¢/kWh, 5.3 times what OK pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.4 m/s instead of 4.06. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OK
Choctaw County is the 2,021st windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in OK is Cimarron County at 6.82 m/s, payback 28 years.
Month by month in Choctaw County
March is the strongest month here, at 4.72 m/s and about 910 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.24 m/s and 287 kWh, so the best month makes 3.2 times the worst. November to March brings in 52% of the year's output in Choctaw County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.37 m/s | 727 kWh | $100 |
| February | 4.51 m/s | 720 kWh | $99 |
| March | 4.72 m/s | 910 kWh | $126 |
| April | 4.73 m/s | 885 kWh | $122 |
| May | 4.16 m/s | 630 kWh | $87 |
| June | 3.71 m/s | 427 kWh | $59 |
| July | 3.26 m/s | 292 kWh | $40 |
| August | 3.24 m/s | 287 kWh | $40 |
| September | 3.49 m/s | 353 kWh | $49 |
| October | 4.00 m/s | 561 kWh | $77 |
| November | 4.32 m/s | 680 kWh | $94 |
| December | 4.24 m/s | 664 kWh | $92 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Choctaw County averages 2.69 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.92 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.375, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 4,286 to 11,999 kWh a year, 180% 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 | 3.49 m/s | 4,286 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.06 m/s | 6,894 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 4.53 m/s | 9,489 kWh | 76 years |
| 50 m | 4.92 m/s | 11,999 kWh | 60 years |
Counties around Choctaw County
6 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Fannin County, averages 5.72 m/s.
- Lamar County, TX: 5.37 m/s, 15,105 kWh, payback 41 years (25 mi)
- Pushmataha County, OK: 4.18 m/s, 7,515 kWh, payback 96 years (26 mi)
- Atoka County, OK: 5.49 m/s, 15,965 kWh, payback 45 years (37 mi)
- Red River County, TX: 5.04 m/s, 12,805 kWh, payback 49 years (40 mi)
- Bryan County, OK: 5.29 m/s, 14,538 kWh, payback 50 years (41 mi)
- Fannin County, TX: 5.72 m/s, 17,638 kWh, payback 35 years (44 mi)
Sun versus wind in Choctaw County
Choctaw County gets 4.5 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,314 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 688. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.9 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.