Wind Turbine Payback in Fannin County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Fannin 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 Fannin County, TX averages 5.72 m/s (12.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 17,638 kWh a year, worth $2,827 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 35 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Fannin County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Fannin County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 5.72 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,355 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,764, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 28¢/kWh, 1.8 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 5.72. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Fannin County is the 1,124th 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 Fannin County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.68 m/s and about 2,035 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.51 m/s and 798 kWh, so the best month makes 2.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 50% of the year's output in Fannin County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.15 m/s | 1,770 kWh | $284 |
| February | 6.32 m/s | 1,695 kWh | $272 |
| March | 6.56 m/s | 2,026 kWh | $325 |
| April | 6.68 m/s | 2,035 kWh | $326 |
| May | 5.92 m/s | 1,620 kWh | $260 |
| June | 5.23 m/s | 1,163 kWh | $186 |
| July | 4.63 m/s | 862 kWh | $138 |
| August | 4.51 m/s | 798 kWh | $128 |
| September | 4.79 m/s | 917 kWh | $147 |
| October | 5.63 m/s | 1,443 kWh | $231 |
| November | 6.17 m/s | 1,724 kWh | $276 |
| December | 6.06 m/s | 1,709 kWh | $274 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Fannin County averages 4.39 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.47 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.241, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 13,823 to 23,186 kWh a year, 68% 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 | 5.19 m/s | 13,823 kWh | 45 years |
| 30 m | 5.72 m/s | 17,642 kWh | 35 years |
| 40 m | 6.13 m/s | 20,677 kWh | 30 years |
| 50 m | 6.47 m/s | 23,186 kWh | 27 years |
Counties around Fannin County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Grayson County, averages 5.89 m/s.
- Bryan County, OK: 5.29 m/s, 14,538 kWh, payback 50 years (27 mi)
- Delta County, TX: 5.37 m/s, 15,105 kWh, payback 41 years (29 mi)
- Lamar County, TX: 5.37 m/s, 15,105 kWh, payback 41 years (31 mi)
- Hunt County, TX: 5.71 m/s, 17,565 kWh, payback 36 years (32 mi)
- Grayson County, TX: 5.89 m/s, 18,890 kWh, payback 33 years (33 mi)
- Collin County, TX: 5.77 m/s, 18,006 kWh, payback 35 years (39 mi)
Sun versus wind in Fannin County
Fannin County gets 4.64 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,355 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,764. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.3 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.