Wind Turbine Payback in Hardin County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Hardin 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 Hardin County, TX averages 3.14 m/s (7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 3,034 kWh a year, worth $486 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of over 100 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Hardin County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Hardin County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 3.14 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,337 kWh a year here against the turbine's 303, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 165¢/kWh, 10.3 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 3.14. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Hardin County is the 2,952nd 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 Hardin County
April is the strongest month here, at 3.64 m/s and about 402 kWh. August is the weakest, 2.56 m/s and 125 kWh, so the best month makes 3.2 times the worst. November to March brings in 51% of the year's output in Hardin County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.32 m/s | 311 kWh | $50 |
| February | 3.42 m/s | 307 kWh | $49 |
| March | 3.51 m/s | 371 kWh | $59 |
| April | 3.64 m/s | 402 kWh | $64 |
| May | 3.32 m/s | 311 kWh | $50 |
| June | 2.83 m/s | 175 kWh | $28 |
| July | 2.56 m/s | 125 kWh | $20 |
| August | 2.56 m/s | 125 kWh | $20 |
| September | 2.80 m/s | 168 kWh | $27 |
| October | 3.13 m/s | 254 kWh | $41 |
| November | 3.28 m/s | 289 kWh | $46 |
| December | 3.34 m/s | 316 kWh | $51 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Hardin County averages 1.86 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.01 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.477, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 1,543 to 6,628 kWh a year, 330% 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 | 2.59 m/s | 1,543 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.14 m/s | 3,043 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.61 m/s | 4,757 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 4.01 m/s | 6,628 kWh | 94 years |
Counties around Hardin County
6 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Orange County, averages 4.69 m/s.
- Liberty County, TX: 4.35 m/s, 8,460 kWh, payback 74 years (29 mi)
- Tyler County, TX: 3.18 m/s, 3,165 kWh, payback over 100 years (30 mi)
- Orange County, TX: 4.69 m/s, 10,508 kWh, payback 59 years (33 mi)
- Jefferson County, TX: 4.32 m/s, 8,289 kWh, payback 75 years (36 mi)
- Jasper County, TX: 3.18 m/s, 3,165 kWh, payback over 100 years (37 mi)
- Polk County, TX: 3.3 m/s, 3,577 kWh, payback over 100 years (41 mi)
Sun versus wind in Hardin County
Hardin County gets 4.58 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,337 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 303. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 4.4 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.