Wind Turbine Payback in Elbert County, CO
Wind turbine payback in Elbert 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 Elbert County, CO averages 5.42 m/s (12.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 15,462 kWh a year, worth $2,598 at CO's 16.8¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 39 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Elbert County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Elbert County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.4 m/s at the hub against 5.42 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,416 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,546, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 32¢/kWh, 1.9 times what CO pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.4 m/s instead of 5.42. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of CO
Elbert County is the 1,264th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in CO is Baca County at 6.65 m/s, payback 24 years.
Month by month in Elbert County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.10 m/s and about 1,683 kWh. July is the weakest, 4.77 m/s and 938 kWh, so the best month makes 1.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 46% of the year's output in Elbert County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.70 m/s | 1,484 kWh | $249 |
| February | 5.70 m/s | 1,340 kWh | $225 |
| March | 5.86 m/s | 1,583 kWh | $266 |
| April | 6.10 m/s | 1,683 kWh | $283 |
| May | 5.26 m/s | 1,218 kWh | $205 |
| June | 5.16 m/s | 1,118 kWh | $188 |
| July | 4.77 m/s | 938 kWh | $158 |
| August | 4.81 m/s | 957 kWh | $161 |
| September | 5.21 m/s | 1,148 kWh | $193 |
| October | 5.47 m/s | 1,347 kWh | $226 |
| November | 5.63 m/s | 1,393 kWh | $234 |
| December | 5.47 m/s | 1,341 kWh | $225 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Elbert County averages 4.19 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.11 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.234, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 12,071 to 20,520 kWh a year, 70% 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 | 4.93 m/s | 12,071 kWh | 49 years |
| 30 m | 5.42 m/s | 15,473 kWh | 39 years |
| 40 m | 5.8 m/s | 18,220 kWh | 33 years |
| 50 m | 6.11 m/s | 20,520 kWh | 29 years |
Counties around Elbert County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Lincoln County, averages 5.67 m/s.
- Arapahoe County, CO: 5.42 m/s, 15,462 kWh, payback 39 years (26 mi)
- Lincoln County, CO: 5.67 m/s, 17,272 kWh, payback 35 years (39 mi)
- Adams County, CO: 4.87 m/s, 11,668 kWh, payback 51 years (40 mi)
- El Paso County, CO: 5.4 m/s, 15,319 kWh, payback 39 years (40 mi)
- Douglas County, CO: 4.97 m/s, 12,333 kWh, payback 48 years (43 mi)
- Denver County, CO: 4.76 m/s, 10,954 kWh, payback 54 years (51 mi)
Sun versus wind in Elbert County
Elbert County gets 4.85 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,416 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,546. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.1 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.