Wind Turbine Payback in Hodgeman County, KS
Wind turbine payback in Hodgeman 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 Hodgeman County, KS averages 6.66 m/s (14.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 24,582 kWh a year, worth $3,751 at KS's 15.26¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 27 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Hodgeman County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Hodgeman County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 6.66 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,390 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,458, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 20¢/kWh, 1.3 times what KS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 6.66. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of KS
Hodgeman County is the 84th 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 Hodgeman County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.46 m/s and about 2,489 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.94 m/s and 1,634 kWh, so the best month makes 1.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 41% of the year's output in Hodgeman County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.34 m/s | 1,888 kWh | $288 |
| February | 6.54 m/s | 1,817 kWh | $277 |
| March | 6.99 m/s | 2,289 kWh | $349 |
| April | 7.46 m/s | 2,489 kWh | $380 |
| May | 6.78 m/s | 2,162 kWh | $330 |
| June | 6.92 m/s | 2,173 kWh | $332 |
| July | 6.07 m/s | 1,719 kWh | $262 |
| August | 5.94 m/s | 1,634 kWh | $249 |
| September | 6.82 m/s | 2,114 kWh | $323 |
| October | 6.81 m/s | 2,179 kWh | $333 |
| November | 6.76 m/s | 2,082 kWh | $318 |
| December | 6.45 m/s | 1,956 kWh | $298 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Hodgeman County averages 5.27 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.42 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.213, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 20,478 to 29,989 kWh a year, 46% 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 | 6.1 m/s | 20,478 kWh | 32 years |
| 30 m | 6.66 m/s | 24,546 kWh | 27 years |
| 40 m | 7.08 m/s | 27,582 kWh | 24 years |
| 50 m | 7.42 m/s | 29,989 kWh | 22 years |
Counties around Hodgeman County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Edwards County, averages 6.68 m/s.
- Ness County, KS: 6.5 m/s, 23,407 kWh, payback 28 years (27 mi)
- Ford County, KS: 6.58 m/s, 23,996 kWh, payback 27 years (28 mi)
- Edwards County, KS: 6.68 m/s, 24,728 kWh, payback 27 years (35 mi)
- Pawnee County, KS: 6.68 m/s, 24,728 kWh, payback 27 years (37 mi)
- Gray County, KS: 6.52 m/s, 23,554 kWh, payback 28 years (38 mi)
- Lane County, KS: 6.45 m/s, 23,038 kWh, payback 28 years (41 mi)
Sun versus wind in Hodgeman County
Hodgeman County gets 4.76 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,390 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,458. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.8 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.