Wind Turbine Payback in Gove County, KS
Wind turbine payback in Gove 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 Gove County, KS averages 6.42 m/s (14.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 22,817 kWh a year, worth $3,482 at KS's 15.26¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 29 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Gove County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Gove County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 6.42 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,419 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,282, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 22¢/kWh, 1.4 times what KS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 6.42. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of KS
Gove County is the 301st 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 Gove County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.14 m/s and about 2,304 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.70 m/s and 1,485 kWh, so the best month makes 1.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 42% of the year's output in Gove County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.24 m/s | 1,827 kWh | $279 |
| February | 6.36 m/s | 1,717 kWh | $262 |
| March | 6.72 m/s | 2,124 kWh | $324 |
| April | 7.14 m/s | 2,304 kWh | $352 |
| May | 6.54 m/s | 2,013 kWh | $307 |
| June | 6.45 m/s | 1,894 kWh | $289 |
| July | 5.82 m/s | 1,557 kWh | $238 |
| August | 5.70 m/s | 1,485 kWh | $227 |
| September | 6.58 m/s | 1,969 kWh | $300 |
| October | 6.61 m/s | 2,057 kWh | $314 |
| November | 6.54 m/s | 1,948 kWh | $297 |
| December | 6.28 m/s | 1,850 kWh | $282 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Gove County averages 5.05 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.17 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.218, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 18,755 to 28,250 kWh a year, 51% 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 | 5.87 m/s | 18,755 kWh | 35 years |
| 30 m | 6.41 m/s | 22,775 kWh | 29 years |
| 40 m | 6.83 m/s | 25,816 kWh | 25 years |
| 50 m | 7.17 m/s | 28,250 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Gove County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Ness County, averages 6.5 m/s.
- Sheridan County, KS: 6.44 m/s, 22,964 kWh, payback 29 years (30 mi)
- Lane County, KS: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 28 years (30 mi)
- Trego County, KS: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 28 years (33 mi)
- Logan County, KS: 6.36 m/s, 22,373 kWh, payback 29 years (36 mi)
- Scott County, KS: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 28 years (38 mi)
- Ness County, KS: 6.5 m/s, 23,407 kWh, payback 28 years (43 mi)
Sun versus wind in Gove County
Gove County gets 4.86 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,419 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,282. 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.