Wind Turbine Payback in Franklin County, TX
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, TX averages 4.89 m/s (10.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 11,800 kWh a year, worth $1,892 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 53 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, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 4.89 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,340 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,180, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 42¢/kWh, 2.6 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 4.89. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Franklin County is the 1,510th 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 Franklin County
March is the strongest month here, at 5.60 m/s and about 1,427 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.85 m/s and 497 kWh, so the best month makes 2.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 52% of the year's output in Franklin County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.35 m/s | 1,273 kWh | $204 |
| February | 5.47 m/s | 1,216 kWh | $195 |
| March | 5.60 m/s | 1,427 kWh | $229 |
| April | 5.66 m/s | 1,412 kWh | $226 |
| May | 4.98 m/s | 1,053 kWh | $169 |
| June | 4.29 m/s | 670 kWh | $107 |
| July | 3.91 m/s | 522 kWh | $84 |
| August | 3.85 m/s | 497 kWh | $80 |
| September | 4.21 m/s | 630 kWh | $101 |
| October | 4.82 m/s | 961 kWh | $154 |
| November | 5.29 m/s | 1,196 kWh | $192 |
| December | 5.24 m/s | 1,205 kWh | $193 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Franklin County averages 3.6 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.63 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.278, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 8,540 to 16,980 kWh a year, 99% 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 | 4.36 m/s | 8,540 kWh | 73 years |
| 30 m | 4.88 m/s | 11,765 kWh | 53 years |
| 40 m | 5.29 m/s | 14,547 kWh | 43 years |
| 50 m | 5.63 m/s | 16,980 kWh | 37 years |
Counties around Franklin County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Hopkins County, averages 5.53 m/s.
- Titus County, TX: 4.89 m/s, 11,800 kWh, payback 53 years (15 mi)
- Camp County, TX: 4.89 m/s, 11,800 kWh, payback 53 years (20 mi)
- Hopkins County, TX: 5.53 m/s, 16,254 kWh, payback 38 years (20 mi)
- Morris County, TX: 4.89 m/s, 11,800 kWh, payback 53 years (29 mi)
- Wood County, TX: 5.53 m/s, 16,254 kWh, payback 38 years (29 mi)
- Delta County, TX: 5.37 m/s, 15,105 kWh, payback 41 years (30 mi)
Sun versus wind in Franklin County
Franklin County gets 4.59 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,340 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,180. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.1 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.