Wind Turbine Payback in Lonoke County, AR
Wind turbine payback in Lonoke 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 Lonoke County, AR averages 4.68 m/s (10.5 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 10,445 kWh a year, worth $1,435 at AR's 13.74¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 70 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Lonoke County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Lonoke County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.4 m/s at the hub against 4.68 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,323 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,045, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 48¢/kWh, 3.5 times what AR pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.4 m/s instead of 4.68. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of AR
Lonoke County is the 1,635th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in AR is Mississippi County at 5.35 m/s, payback 49 years.
Month by month in Lonoke County
March is the strongest month here, at 5.47 m/s and about 1,345 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.54 m/s and 383 kWh, so the best month makes 3.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 54% of the year's output in Lonoke County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.22 m/s | 1,194 kWh | $164 |
| February | 5.34 m/s | 1,144 kWh | $157 |
| March | 5.47 m/s | 1,345 kWh | $185 |
| April | 5.51 m/s | 1,322 kWh | $182 |
| May | 4.71 m/s | 904 kWh | $124 |
| June | 3.93 m/s | 514 kWh | $71 |
| July | 3.54 m/s | 383 kWh | $53 |
| August | 3.62 m/s | 410 kWh | $56 |
| September | 4.12 m/s | 593 kWh | $81 |
| October | 4.63 m/s | 863 kWh | $119 |
| November | 5.07 m/s | 1,072 kWh | $147 |
| December | 5.04 m/s | 1,088 kWh | $149 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Lonoke County averages 3.42 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.41 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.285, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 7,443 to 15,390 kWh a year, 107% 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 | 4.17 m/s | 7,443 kWh | 98 years |
| 30 m | 4.68 m/s | 10,426 kWh | 70 years |
| 40 m | 5.08 m/s | 13,055 kWh | 56 years |
| 50 m | 5.41 m/s | 15,390 kWh | 47 years |
Counties around Lonoke County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Prairie County, averages 5.12 m/s.
- Prairie County, AR: 5.12 m/s, 13,353 kWh, payback 55 years (20 mi)
- Pulaski County, AR: 4.08 m/s, 6,986 kWh, payback over 100 years (24 mi)
- Jefferson County, AR: 4.65 m/s, 10,257 kWh, payback 71 years (33 mi)
- White County, AR: 3.89 m/s, 6,037 kWh, payback over 100 years (35 mi)
- Faulkner County, AR: 4.08 m/s, 6,986 kWh, payback over 100 years (37 mi)
- Monroe County, AR: 4.94 m/s, 12,132 kWh, payback 60 years (40 mi)
Sun versus wind in Lonoke County
Lonoke County gets 4.53 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,323 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,045. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.3 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.