Wind Turbine Payback in Clark County, NV
Wind turbine payback in Clark 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 Clark County, NV averages 4.7 m/s (10.5 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 10,571 kWh a year, worth $1,412 at NV's 13.36¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 71 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Clark County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Clark County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.6 m/s at the hub against 4.7 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,638 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,057, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 47¢/kWh, 3.5 times what NV pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.6 m/s instead of 4.7. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NV
Clark County is the 1,610th 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 Clark County
April is the strongest month here, at 5.38 m/s and about 1,248 kWh. September is the weakest, 4.20 m/s and 625 kWh, so the best month makes 2.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 40% of the year's output in Clark County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.79 m/s | 946 kWh | $126 |
| February | 4.65 m/s | 785 kWh | $105 |
| March | 4.93 m/s | 1,026 kWh | $137 |
| April | 5.38 m/s | 1,248 kWh | $167 |
| May | 5.17 m/s | 1,161 kWh | $155 |
| June | 5.26 m/s | 1,175 kWh | $157 |
| July | 4.41 m/s | 749 kWh | $100 |
| August | 4.22 m/s | 659 kWh | $88 |
| September | 4.20 m/s | 625 kWh | $84 |
| October | 4.40 m/s | 745 kWh | $100 |
| November | 4.49 m/s | 764 kWh | $102 |
| December | 4.53 m/s | 808 kWh | $108 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Clark County averages 3.72 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.24 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.213, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 8,238 to 14,186 kWh a year, 72% 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 | 4.31 m/s | 8,238 kWh | 91 years |
| 30 m | 4.7 m/s | 10,570 kWh | 71 years |
| 40 m | 5 m/s | 12,513 kWh | 60 years |
| 50 m | 5.24 m/s | 14,186 kWh | 53 years |
Counties around Clark County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Washington County, averages 5.14 m/s.
- Mohave County, AZ: 4.69 m/s, 10,508 kWh, payback 62 years (79 mi)
- Lincoln County, NV: 4.67 m/s, 10,382 kWh, payback 72 years (99 mi)
- Washington County, UT: 5.14 m/s, 13,490 kWh, payback 56 years (111 mi)
- San Bernardino County, CA: 4.3 m/s, 8,176 kWh, payback 38 years (114 mi)
- Inyo County, CA: 3.03 m/s, 2,691 kWh, payback over 100 years (135 mi)
- Nye County, NV: 4.71 m/s, 10,635 kWh, payback 70 years (145 mi)
Sun versus wind in Clark County
Clark County gets 5.61 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,638 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,057. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.5 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.