Wind Turbine Payback in Kit Carson County, CO
Wind turbine payback in Kit Carson 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 Kit Carson County, CO averages 6.18 m/s (13.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,039 kWh a year, worth $3,535 at CO's 16.8¢/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 Kit Carson County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Kit Carson County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.4 m/s at the hub against 6.18 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,425 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,104, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 24¢/kWh, 1.4 times what CO pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.4 m/s instead of 6.18. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of CO
Kit Carson County is the 599th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in CO is Baca County at 6.65 m/s, payback 24 years.
Month by month in Kit Carson County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.85 m/s and about 2,133 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.49 m/s and 1,356 kWh, so the best month makes 1.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 44% of the year's output in Kit Carson County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.29 m/s | 1,859 kWh | $312 |
| February | 6.29 m/s | 1,679 kWh | $282 |
| March | 6.56 m/s | 2,027 kWh | $341 |
| April | 6.85 m/s | 2,133 kWh | $358 |
| May | 6.21 m/s | 1,808 kWh | $304 |
| June | 5.95 m/s | 1,587 kWh | $267 |
| July | 5.49 m/s | 1,356 kWh | $228 |
| August | 5.49 m/s | 1,356 kWh | $228 |
| September | 6.02 m/s | 1,630 kWh | $274 |
| October | 6.32 m/s | 1,876 kWh | $315 |
| November | 6.42 m/s | 1,875 kWh | $315 |
| December | 6.29 m/s | 1,859 kWh | $312 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Kit Carson County averages 4.84 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.92 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.222, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 17,099 to 26,469 kWh a year, 55% 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 | 5.65 m/s | 17,099 kWh | 35 years |
| 30 m | 6.18 m/s | 21,025 kWh | 28 years |
| 40 m | 6.59 m/s | 24,036 kWh | 25 years |
| 50 m | 6.92 m/s | 26,469 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Kit Carson County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Wallace County, averages 6.3 m/s.
- Cheyenne County, CO: 6.14 m/s, 20,742 kWh, payback 29 years (32 mi)
- Sherman County, KS: 6.28 m/s, 21,781 kWh, payback 30 years (47 mi)
- Yuma County, CO: 6.12 m/s, 20,594 kWh, payback 29 years (49 mi)
- Wallace County, KS: 6.3 m/s, 21,929 kWh, payback 30 years (52 mi)
- Lincoln County, CO: 5.67 m/s, 17,272 kWh, payback 35 years (53 mi)
- Washington County, CO: 5.98 m/s, 19,556 kWh, payback 30 years (56 mi)
Sun versus wind in Kit Carson County
Kit Carson County gets 4.88 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,425 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,104. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.5 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.