Wind Turbine Payback in Logan County, CO
Wind turbine payback in Logan 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 Logan County, CO averages 5.89 m/s (13.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 18,890 kWh a year, worth $3,174 at CO's 16.8¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 32 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Logan County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Logan County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.4 m/s at the hub against 5.89 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,393 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,889, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 26¢/kWh, 1.6 times what CO pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.4 m/s instead of 5.89. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of CO
Logan County is the 1,001st 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 Logan County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.57 m/s and about 1,965 kWh. July is the weakest, 5.08 m/s and 1,112 kWh, so the best month makes 1.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 47% of the year's output in Logan County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.20 m/s | 1,802 kWh | $303 |
| February | 6.20 m/s | 1,627 kWh | $273 |
| March | 6.40 m/s | 1,925 kWh | $323 |
| April | 6.57 m/s | 1,965 kWh | $330 |
| May | 5.82 m/s | 1,561 kWh | $262 |
| June | 5.49 m/s | 1,313 kWh | $221 |
| July | 5.08 m/s | 1,112 kWh | $187 |
| August | 5.15 m/s | 1,154 kWh | $194 |
| September | 5.51 m/s | 1,324 kWh | $222 |
| October | 6.05 m/s | 1,706 kWh | $287 |
| November | 6.15 m/s | 1,711 kWh | $287 |
| December | 6.11 m/s | 1,746 kWh | $293 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Logan County averages 4.59 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.62 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.228, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 15,118 to 24,289 kWh a year, 61% 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 | 5.37 m/s | 15,118 kWh | 39 years |
| 30 m | 5.89 m/s | 18,906 kWh | 32 years |
| 40 m | 6.29 m/s | 21,867 kWh | 27 years |
| 50 m | 6.62 m/s | 24,289 kWh | 25 years |
Counties around Logan County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Sedgwick County, averages 6.2 m/s.
- Cheyenne County, NE: 6.17 m/s, 20,965 kWh, payback 37 years (34 mi)
- Sedgwick County, CO: 6.2 m/s, 21,187 kWh, payback 28 years (40 mi)
- Phillips County, CO: 6.16 m/s, 20,891 kWh, payback 29 years (40 mi)
- Kimball County, NE: 6.1 m/s, 20,446 kWh, payback 38 years (46 mi)
- Deuel County, NE: 6.2 m/s, 21,187 kWh, payback 37 years (48 mi)
- Morgan County, CO: 5.37 m/s, 15,105 kWh, payback 39 years (50 mi)
Sun versus wind in Logan County
Logan County gets 4.77 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,393 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,889. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.4 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.