Wind Turbine Payback in Kenedy County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Kenedy 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 Kenedy County, TX averages 6.4 m/s (14.3 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 22,669 kWh a year, worth $3,634 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 28 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Kenedy County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Kenedy County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 6.4 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,416 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,267, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 22¢/kWh, 1.4 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 6.4. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Kenedy County is the 322nd 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 Kenedy County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.19 m/s and about 2,335 kWh. September is the weakest, 5.43 m/s and 1,279 kWh, so the best month makes 1.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 45% of the year's output in Kenedy County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.62 m/s | 2,060 kWh | $330 |
| February | 6.81 m/s | 1,969 kWh | $316 |
| March | 6.99 m/s | 2,292 kWh | $367 |
| April | 7.19 m/s | 2,335 kWh | $374 |
| May | 6.96 m/s | 2,275 kWh | $365 |
| June | 6.25 m/s | 1,772 kWh | $284 |
| July | 6.16 m/s | 1,773 kWh | $284 |
| August | 5.47 m/s | 1,344 kWh | $215 |
| September | 5.43 m/s | 1,279 kWh | $205 |
| October | 5.99 m/s | 1,669 kWh | $268 |
| November | 6.35 m/s | 1,833 kWh | $294 |
| December | 6.52 m/s | 2,003 kWh | $321 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Kenedy County averages 5.3 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.98 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.171, typical of very open, smooth ground where height adds little. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 19,465 to 26,900 kWh a year, 38% 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 | 5.97 m/s | 19,465 kWh | 32 years |
| 30 m | 6.4 m/s | 22,641 kWh | 28 years |
| 40 m | 6.72 m/s | 25,011 kWh | 25 years |
| 50 m | 6.98 m/s | 26,900 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Kenedy County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Kenedy County.
- Willacy County, TX: 6.4 m/s, 22,669 kWh, payback 28 years (28 mi)
- Kleberg County, TX: 6.18 m/s, 21,039 kWh, payback 30 years (38 mi)
- Brooks County, TX: 5.96 m/s, 19,408 kWh, payback 32 years (40 mi)
- Hidalgo County, TX: 6.05 m/s, 20,075 kWh, payback 31 years (50 mi)
- Cameron County, TX: 6.36 m/s, 22,373 kWh, payback 28 years (55 mi)
- Nueces County, TX: 6.18 m/s, 21,039 kWh, payback 30 years (59 mi)
Sun versus wind in Kenedy County
Kenedy County gets 4.85 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,416 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,267. 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.