Wind Turbine Payback in El Paso County, TX
Wind turbine payback in El Paso 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 El Paso County, TX averages 5.01 m/s (11.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 12,602 kWh a year, worth $2,020 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 50 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in El Paso County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in El Paso County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 5.01 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,723 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,260, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 40¢/kWh, 2.5 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 5.01. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
El Paso County is the 1,449th 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 El Paso County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.27 m/s and about 1,783 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.98 m/s and 549 kWh, so the best month makes 3.2 times the worst. November to March brings in 42% of the year's output in El Paso County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.81 m/s | 957 kWh | $153 |
| February | 5.32 m/s | 1,131 kWh | $181 |
| March | 5.65 m/s | 1,455 kWh | $233 |
| April | 6.27 m/s | 1,783 kWh | $286 |
| May | 5.76 m/s | 1,522 kWh | $244 |
| June | 5.09 m/s | 1,079 kWh | $173 |
| July | 4.30 m/s | 694 kWh | $111 |
| August | 3.98 m/s | 549 kWh | $88 |
| September | 4.55 m/s | 792 kWh | $127 |
| October | 4.80 m/s | 952 kWh | $153 |
| November | 4.92 m/s | 984 kWh | $158 |
| December | 4.68 m/s | 889 kWh | $143 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in El Paso County averages 3.95 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.59 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.216, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 9,862 to 16,689 kWh a year, 69% 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 | 4.59 m/s | 9,862 kWh | 63 years |
| 30 m | 5.01 m/s | 12,575 kWh | 50 years |
| 40 m | 5.33 m/s | 14,799 kWh | 42 years |
| 50 m | 5.59 m/s | 16,689 kWh | 37 years |
Counties around El Paso County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Culberson County, averages 5.63 m/s.
- Doña Ana County, NM: 5.01 m/s, 12,602 kWh, payback 52 years (53 mi)
- Hudspeth County, TX: 5.39 m/s, 15,247 kWh, payback 41 years (55 mi)
- Otero County, NM: 5.15 m/s, 13,560 kWh, payback 48 years (65 mi)
- Luna County, NM: 5.33 m/s, 14,821 kWh, payback 44 years (93 mi)
- Culberson County, TX: 5.63 m/s, 16,980 kWh, payback 37 years (103 mi)
- Sierra County, NM: 5.05 m/s, 12,873 kWh, payback 51 years (109 mi)
Sun versus wind in El Paso County
El Paso County gets 5.9 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,723 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,260. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.4 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.