Wind Turbine Payback in Greer County, OK
Wind turbine payback in Greer 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 Greer County, OK averages 6.23 m/s (13.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,410 kWh a year, worth $2,957 at OK's 13.81¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 34 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Greer County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Greer County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.4 m/s at the hub against 6.23 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,478 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,141, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 23¢/kWh, 1.7 times what OK pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.4 m/s instead of 6.23. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OK
Greer County is the 550th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in OK is Cimarron County at 6.82 m/s, payback 28 years.
Month by month in Greer County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.19 m/s and about 2,331 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.40 m/s and 1,299 kWh, so the best month makes 1.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 43% of the year's output in Greer County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.09 m/s | 1,731 kWh | $239 |
| February | 6.25 m/s | 1,655 kWh | $229 |
| March | 6.70 m/s | 2,111 kWh | $292 |
| April | 7.19 m/s | 2,331 kWh | $322 |
| May | 6.58 m/s | 2,039 kWh | $282 |
| June | 6.45 m/s | 1,892 kWh | $261 |
| July | 5.57 m/s | 1,402 kWh | $194 |
| August | 5.40 m/s | 1,299 kWh | $179 |
| September | 5.73 m/s | 1,459 kWh | $201 |
| October | 6.37 m/s | 1,905 kWh | $263 |
| November | 6.45 m/s | 1,892 kWh | $261 |
| December | 6.09 m/s | 1,731 kWh | $239 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Greer County averages 4.86 m/s; at 50 m it is 7 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.227, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 17,385 to 27,043 kWh a year, 56% 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 | 5.69 m/s | 17,385 kWh | 42 years |
| 30 m | 6.23 m/s | 21,437 kWh | 34 years |
| 40 m | 6.65 m/s | 24,540 kWh | 30 years |
| 50 m | 7 m/s | 27,043 kWh | 27 years |
Counties around Greer County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Beckham County, averages 6.56 m/s.
- Harmon County, OK: 6.04 m/s, 20,001 kWh, payback 36 years (21 mi)
- Beckham County, OK: 6.56 m/s, 23,849 kWh, payback 30 years (25 mi)
- Jackson County, OK: 6.07 m/s, 20,223 kWh, payback 36 years (25 mi)
- Kiowa County, OK: 6.26 m/s, 21,632 kWh, payback 34 years (32 mi)
- Washita County, OK: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 31 years (40 mi)
- Collingsworth County, TX: 6.22 m/s, 21,336 kWh, payback 29 years (41 mi)
Sun versus wind in Greer County
Greer County gets 5.06 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,478 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,141. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.4 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.