Wind Turbine Payback in Lea County, NM
Wind turbine payback in Lea 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 Lea County, NM averages 6.16 m/s (13.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 20,891 kWh a year, worth $3,205 at NM's 15.34¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 31 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Lea County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Lea County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 6.16 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,650 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,089, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 24¢/kWh, 1.6 times what NM pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 6.16. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NM
Lea County is the 630th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NM is Union County at 6.75 m/s, payback 26 years.
Month by month in Lea County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.16 m/s and about 2,317 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.15 m/s and 1,149 kWh, so the best month makes 2.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 46% of the year's output in Lea County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.36 m/s | 1,900 kWh | $291 |
| February | 6.62 m/s | 1,862 kWh | $286 |
| March | 6.72 m/s | 2,128 kWh | $326 |
| April | 7.16 m/s | 2,317 kWh | $355 |
| May | 6.49 m/s | 1,984 kWh | $304 |
| June | 6.17 m/s | 1,724 kWh | $264 |
| July | 5.41 m/s | 1,309 kWh | $201 |
| August | 5.15 m/s | 1,149 kWh | $176 |
| September | 5.40 m/s | 1,262 kWh | $194 |
| October | 5.98 m/s | 1,658 kWh | $254 |
| November | 6.22 m/s | 1,751 kWh | $269 |
| December | 6.34 m/s | 1,888 kWh | $290 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Lea County averages 4.82 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.91 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.224, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 16,964 to 26,397 kWh a year, 56% 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 | 5.63 m/s | 16,964 kWh | 38 years |
| 30 m | 6.16 m/s | 20,912 kWh | 31 years |
| 40 m | 6.57 m/s | 23,945 kWh | 27 years |
| 50 m | 6.91 m/s | 26,397 kWh | 25 years |
Counties around Lea County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Cochran County, averages 6.28 m/s.
- Yoakum County, TX: 6.16 m/s, 20,891 kWh, payback 30 years (42 mi)
- Gaines County, TX: 6.11 m/s, 20,520 kWh, payback 30 years (46 mi)
- Andrews County, TX: 6.11 m/s, 20,520 kWh, payback 30 years (56 mi)
- Eddy County, NM: 5.59 m/s, 16,689 kWh, payback 39 years (57 mi)
- Cochran County, TX: 6.28 m/s, 21,781 kWh, payback 29 years (65 mi)
- Loving County, TX: 5.4 m/s, 15,319 kWh, payback 41 years (66 mi)
Sun versus wind in Lea County
Lea County gets 5.65 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,650 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,089. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.3 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.