Wind Turbine Payback in Lander County, NV
Wind turbine payback in Lander 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 Lander County, NV averages 4.15 m/s (9.3 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 7,354 kWh a year, worth $983 at NV's 13.36¢/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 Lander County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Lander County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.6 m/s at the hub against 4.15 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,495 kWh a year here against the turbine's 735, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 68¢/kWh, 5.1 times what NV pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.6 m/s instead of 4.15. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NV
Lander County is the 1,974th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NV is Nye County at 4.71 m/s, payback 70 years.
Month by month in Lander County
April is the strongest month here, at 4.71 m/s and about 873 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.65 m/s and 422 kWh, so the best month makes 2.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 47% of the year's output in Lander County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.17 m/s | 635 kWh | $85 |
| February | 4.41 m/s | 675 kWh | $90 |
| March | 4.58 m/s | 835 kWh | $112 |
| April | 4.71 m/s | 873 kWh | $117 |
| May | 4.21 m/s | 651 kWh | $87 |
| June | 4.15 m/s | 606 kWh | $81 |
| July | 3.65 m/s | 422 kWh | $56 |
| August | 3.69 m/s | 435 kWh | $58 |
| September | 3.79 m/s | 458 kWh | $61 |
| October | 3.91 m/s | 520 kWh | $69 |
| November | 4.24 m/s | 643 kWh | $86 |
| December | 4.41 m/s | 747 kWh | $100 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Lander County averages 3.38 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.57 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.187, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 5,849 to 9,763 kWh a year, 67% 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 | 3.85 m/s | 5,849 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.15 m/s | 7,374 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 4.38 m/s | 8,651 kWh | 87 years |
| 50 m | 4.57 m/s | 9,763 kWh | 77 years |
Counties around Lander County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, White Pine County, averages 4.38 m/s.
- Eureka County, NV: 4.32 m/s, 8,289 kWh, payback 90 years (41 mi)
- Churchill County, NV: 3.58 m/s, 4,653 kWh, payback over 100 years (69 mi)
- Pershing County, NV: 3.52 m/s, 4,408 kWh, payback over 100 years (81 mi)
- Humboldt County, NV: 3.8 m/s, 5,614 kWh, payback over 100 years (119 mi)
- White Pine County, NV: 4.38 m/s, 8,632 kWh, payback 87 years (119 mi)
- Mineral County, NV: 3.75 m/s, 5,387 kWh, payback over 100 years (120 mi)
Sun versus wind in Lander County
Lander County gets 5.12 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,495 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 735. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.0 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.