Wind Turbine Payback in Churchill County, NV
Wind turbine payback in Churchill 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 Churchill County, NV averages 3.58 m/s (8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 4,653 kWh a year, worth $622 at NV's 13.36¢/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 Churchill County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Churchill County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.6 m/s at the hub against 3.58 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,524 kWh a year here against the turbine's 465, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 107¢/kWh, 8.0 times what NV pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.6 m/s instead of 3.58. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NV
Churchill County is the 2,429th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NV is Nye County at 4.71 m/s, payback 70 years.
Month by month in Churchill County
April is the strongest month here, at 4.11 m/s and about 589 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.03 m/s and 229 kWh, so the best month makes 2.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 47% of the year's output in Churchill County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.50 m/s | 368 kWh | $49 |
| February | 3.79 m/s | 428 kWh | $57 |
| March | 3.98 m/s | 549 kWh | $73 |
| April | 4.11 m/s | 589 kWh | $79 |
| May | 3.77 m/s | 464 kWh | $62 |
| June | 3.66 m/s | 409 kWh | $55 |
| July | 3.10 m/s | 246 kWh | $33 |
| August | 3.03 m/s | 229 kWh | $31 |
| September | 3.33 m/s | 302 kWh | $40 |
| October | 3.33 m/s | 312 kWh | $42 |
| November | 3.59 m/s | 387 kWh | $52 |
| December | 3.84 m/s | 492 kWh | $66 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Churchill County averages 2.97 m/s; at 50 m it is 3.91 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.171, typical of very open, smooth ground where height adds little. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 3,731 to 6,134 kWh a year, 64% 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 | 3.34 m/s | 3,731 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.58 m/s | 4,665 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.76 m/s | 5,448 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 3.91 m/s | 6,134 kWh | over 100 years |
Counties around Churchill County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Lander County, averages 4.15 m/s.
- Lyon County, NV: 3.6 m/s, 4,736 kWh, payback over 100 years (61 mi)
- Pershing County, NV: 3.52 m/s, 4,408 kWh, payback over 100 years (63 mi)
- Storey County, NV: 3.6 m/s, 4,736 kWh, payback over 100 years (68 mi)
- Lander County, NV: 4.15 m/s, 7,354 kWh, payback over 100 years (69 mi)
- Mineral County, NV: 3.75 m/s, 5,387 kWh, payback over 100 years (71 mi)
- Carson City, NV: 3.75 m/s, 5,387 kWh, payback over 100 years (84 mi)
Sun versus wind in Churchill County
Churchill County gets 5.22 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,524 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 465. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 3.3 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.