Wind Turbine Payback in Dewey County, OK
Wind turbine payback in Dewey 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 Dewey County, OK averages 6.62 m/s (14.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 24,289 kWh a year, worth $3,354 at OK's 13.81¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 30 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Dewey County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Dewey County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.4 m/s at the hub against 6.62 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,463 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,429, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 21¢/kWh, 1.5 times what OK pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.4 m/s instead of 6.62. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OK
Dewey County is the 102nd 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 Dewey County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.55 m/s and about 2,540 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.75 m/s and 1,514 kWh, so the best month makes 1.7 times the worst. November to March brings in 43% of the year's output in Dewey County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.56 m/s | 2,026 kWh | $280 |
| February | 6.55 m/s | 1,825 kWh | $252 |
| March | 7.07 m/s | 2,340 kWh | $323 |
| April | 7.55 m/s | 2,540 kWh | $351 |
| May | 6.86 m/s | 2,209 kWh | $305 |
| June | 6.82 m/s | 2,116 kWh | $292 |
| July | 5.92 m/s | 1,621 kWh | $224 |
| August | 5.75 m/s | 1,514 kWh | $209 |
| September | 6.23 m/s | 1,760 kWh | $243 |
| October | 6.78 m/s | 2,159 kWh | $298 |
| November | 6.88 m/s | 2,154 kWh | $297 |
| December | 6.56 m/s | 2,026 kWh | $280 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Dewey County averages 5.22 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.4 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.217, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 20,191 to 29,851 kWh a year, 48% 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 | 6.07 m/s | 20,191 kWh | 36 years |
| 30 m | 6.62 m/s | 24,315 kWh | 30 years |
| 40 m | 7.05 m/s | 27,401 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 7.4 m/s | 29,851 kWh | 24 years |
Counties around Dewey County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Ellis County, averages 6.76 m/s.
- Custer County, OK: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 31 years (23 mi)
- Blaine County, OK: 6.4 m/s, 22,669 kWh, payback 32 years (33 mi)
- Woodward County, OK: 6.69 m/s, 24,801 kWh, payback 29 years (34 mi)
- Major County, OK: 6.46 m/s, 23,112 kWh, payback 31 years (35 mi)
- Ellis County, OK: 6.76 m/s, 25,311 kWh, payback 29 years (44 mi)
- Roger Mills County, OK: 6.56 m/s, 23,849 kWh, payback 30 years (45 mi)
Sun versus wind in Dewey County
Dewey County gets 5.01 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,463 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,429. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.7 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.