Wind Turbine Payback in Franklin County, KS
Wind turbine payback in Franklin 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 Franklin County, KS averages 6.06 m/s (13.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 20,149 kWh a year, worth $3,075 at KS's 15.26¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 33 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Franklin County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Franklin County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 6.06 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,276 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,015, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 25¢/kWh, 1.6 times what KS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 6.06. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of KS
Franklin County is the 747th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in KS is Edwards County at 6.68 m/s, payback 27 years.
Month by month in Franklin County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.06 m/s and about 2,261 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.78 m/s and 940 kWh, so the best month makes 2.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 48% of the year's output in Franklin County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.42 m/s | 1,936 kWh | $295 |
| February | 6.42 m/s | 1,749 kWh | $267 |
| March | 6.82 m/s | 2,185 kWh | $333 |
| April | 7.06 m/s | 2,261 kWh | $345 |
| May | 6.09 m/s | 1,730 kWh | $264 |
| June | 5.72 m/s | 1,448 kWh | $221 |
| July | 4.82 m/s | 964 kWh | $147 |
| August | 4.78 m/s | 940 kWh | $143 |
| September | 5.43 m/s | 1,279 kWh | $195 |
| October | 6.32 m/s | 1,875 kWh | $286 |
| November | 6.60 m/s | 1,987 kWh | $303 |
| December | 6.31 m/s | 1,870 kWh | $285 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Franklin County averages 4.68 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.84 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.236, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 16,108 to 25,892 kWh a year, 61% 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 | 5.51 m/s | 16,108 kWh | 41 years |
| 30 m | 6.06 m/s | 20,172 kWh | 33 years |
| 40 m | 6.49 m/s | 23,327 kWh | 28 years |
| 50 m | 6.84 m/s | 25,892 kWh | 25 years |
Counties around Franklin County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Osage County, averages 6.22 m/s.
- Douglas County, KS: 6.06 m/s, 20,149 kWh, payback 33 years (23 mi)
- Anderson County, KS: 6.03 m/s, 19,926 kWh, payback 33 years (24 mi)
- Osage County, KS: 6.22 m/s, 21,336 kWh, payback 31 years (24 mi)
- Miami County, KS: 6.06 m/s, 20,149 kWh, payback 33 years (24 mi)
- Coffey County, KS: 6.18 m/s, 21,039 kWh, payback 31 years (33 mi)
- Linn County, KS: 6.03 m/s, 19,926 kWh, payback 33 years (33 mi)
Sun versus wind in Franklin County
Franklin County gets 4.37 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,276 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,015. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.6 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.