Wind Turbine Payback in Dickens County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Dickens 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 Dickens County, TX averages 6.23 m/s (13.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,410 kWh a year, worth $3,432 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 29 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Dickens County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Dickens County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 6.23 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,521 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,141, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 23¢/kWh, 1.5 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 6.23. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Dickens County is the 550th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in TX is Dallam County at 6.82 m/s, payback 24 years.
Month by month in Dickens County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.18 m/s and about 2,325 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.30 m/s and 1,243 kWh, so the best month makes 1.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 45% of the year's output in Dickens County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.33 m/s | 1,881 kWh | $302 |
| February | 6.47 m/s | 1,780 kWh | $285 |
| March | 6.75 m/s | 2,142 kWh | $343 |
| April | 7.18 m/s | 2,325 kWh | $373 |
| May | 6.49 m/s | 1,981 kWh | $318 |
| June | 6.28 m/s | 1,788 kWh | $287 |
| July | 5.54 m/s | 1,384 kWh | $222 |
| August | 5.30 m/s | 1,243 kWh | $199 |
| September | 5.49 m/s | 1,313 kWh | $210 |
| October | 6.20 m/s | 1,802 kWh | $289 |
| November | 6.47 m/s | 1,907 kWh | $306 |
| December | 6.30 m/s | 1,864 kWh | $299 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Dickens County averages 4.87 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.99 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.225, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 17,402 to 26,971 kWh a year, 55% 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 | 5.69 m/s | 17,402 kWh | 36 years |
| 30 m | 6.23 m/s | 21,418 kWh | 29 years |
| 40 m | 6.65 m/s | 24,492 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 6.99 m/s | 26,971 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Dickens County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Crosby County, averages 6.28 m/s.
- Crosby County, TX: 6.28 m/s, 21,781 kWh, payback 29 years (29 mi)
- Kent County, TX: 6.23 m/s, 21,410 kWh, payback 29 years (30 mi)
- Motley County, TX: 6.28 m/s, 21,781 kWh, payback 29 years (31 mi)
- King County, TX: 6.14 m/s, 20,742 kWh, payback 30 years (31 mi)
- Garza County, TX: 6.18 m/s, 21,039 kWh, payback 30 years (42 mi)
- Stonewall County, TX: 6.23 m/s, 21,410 kWh, payback 29 years (43 mi)
Sun versus wind in Dickens County
Dickens County gets 5.21 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,521 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,141. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.4 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.