Wind Turbine Payback in Crawford County, KS
Wind turbine payback in Crawford 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 Crawford County, KS averages 5.98 m/s (13.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 19,556 kWh a year, worth $2,984 at KS's 15.26¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 34 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Crawford County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Crawford County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 5.98 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,279 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,956, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 26¢/kWh, 1.7 times what KS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 5.98. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of KS
Crawford County is the 873rd 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 Crawford County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.04 m/s and about 2,246 kWh. July is the weakest, 4.73 m/s and 916 kWh, so the best month makes 2.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 48% of the year's output in Crawford County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.28 m/s | 1,850 kWh | $282 |
| February | 6.43 m/s | 1,756 kWh | $268 |
| March | 6.77 m/s | 2,159 kWh | $329 |
| April | 7.04 m/s | 2,246 kWh | $343 |
| May | 6.07 m/s | 1,716 kWh | $262 |
| June | 5.62 m/s | 1,388 kWh | $212 |
| July | 4.73 m/s | 916 kWh | $140 |
| August | 4.74 m/s | 921 kWh | $141 |
| September | 5.25 m/s | 1,170 kWh | $179 |
| October | 6.17 m/s | 1,778 kWh | $271 |
| November | 6.51 m/s | 1,930 kWh | $295 |
| December | 6.23 m/s | 1,816 kWh | $277 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Crawford County averages 4.58 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.77 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.243, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 15,452 to 25,384 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 | 5.42 m/s | 15,452 kWh | 42 years |
| 30 m | 5.98 m/s | 19,554 kWh | 34 years |
| 40 m | 6.41 m/s | 22,763 kWh | 29 years |
| 50 m | 6.77 m/s | 25,384 kWh | 26 years |
Counties around Crawford County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Neosho County, averages 6.09 m/s.
- Cherokee County, KS: 5.88 m/s, 18,816 kWh, payback 35 years (23 mi)
- Bourbon County, KS: 6.03 m/s, 19,926 kWh, payback 33 years (24 mi)
- Neosho County, KS: 6.09 m/s, 20,371 kWh, payback 32 years (26 mi)
- Barton County, MO: 5.91 m/s, 19,038 kWh, payback 37 years (28 mi)
- Labette County, KS: 5.88 m/s, 18,816 kWh, payback 35 years (33 mi)
- Jasper County, MO: 5.78 m/s, 18,079 kWh, payback 39 years (35 mi)
Sun versus wind in Crawford County
Crawford County gets 4.38 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,279 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,956. 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.