Wind Turbine Payback in Los Alamos County, NM
Wind turbine payback in Los Alamos 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 Los Alamos County, NM averages 4.28 m/s (9.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 8,064 kWh a year, worth $1,237 at NM's 15.34¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 81 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Los Alamos County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Los Alamos County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.28 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,615 kWh a year here against the turbine's 806, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 62¢/kWh, 4.0 times what NM pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.28. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NM
Los Alamos County is the 1,903rd 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 Los Alamos County
April is the strongest month here, at 5.32 m/s and about 1,211 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.10 m/s and 248 kWh, so the best month makes 4.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 47% of the year's output in Los Alamos County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.35 m/s | 720 kWh | $110 |
| February | 4.84 m/s | 882 kWh | $135 |
| March | 4.97 m/s | 1,049 kWh | $161 |
| April | 5.32 m/s | 1,211 kWh | $186 |
| May | 4.80 m/s | 953 kWh | $146 |
| June | 4.34 m/s | 688 kWh | $106 |
| July | 3.10 m/s | 248 kWh | $38 |
| August | 3.19 m/s | 271 kWh | $42 |
| September | 3.73 m/s | 436 kWh | $67 |
| October | 4.22 m/s | 658 kWh | $101 |
| November | 4.27 m/s | 660 kWh | $101 |
| December | 4.34 m/s | 711 kWh | $109 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Los Alamos County averages 3.11 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.97 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.291, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 5,645 to 12,333 kWh a year, 118% 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 | 3.81 m/s | 5,645 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.28 m/s | 8,084 kWh | 81 years |
| 40 m | 4.66 m/s | 10,304 kWh | 63 years |
| 50 m | 4.97 m/s | 12,333 kWh | 53 years |
Counties around Los Alamos County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Mora County, averages 5.15 m/s.
- Santa Fe County, NM: 4.59 m/s, 9,885 kWh, payback 66 years (31 mi)
- Sandoval County, NM: 5 m/s, 12,535 kWh, payback 52 years (35 mi)
- Rio Arriba County, NM: 4.04 m/s, 6,780 kWh, payback 96 years (49 mi)
- Bernalillo County, NM: 4.45 m/s, 9,041 kWh, payback 72 years (60 mi)
- Taos County, NM: 4.23 m/s, 7,787 kWh, payback 84 years (61 mi)
- Mora County, NM: 5.15 m/s, 13,560 kWh, payback 48 years (78 mi)
Sun versus wind in Los Alamos County
Los Alamos County gets 5.53 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,615 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 806. 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.