Wind Turbine Payback in Menard County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Menard 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 Menard County, TX averages 6.21 m/s (13.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,262 kWh a year, worth $3,408 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 29 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Menard County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Menard County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 6.21 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,472 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,126, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 24¢/kWh, 1.5 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 6.21. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Menard County is the 576th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in TX is Dallam County at 6.82 m/s, payback 24 years.
Month by month in Menard County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.06 m/s and about 2,258 kWh. September is the weakest, 5.30 m/s and 1,200 kWh, so the best month makes 1.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 45% of the year's output in Menard County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.32 m/s | 1,874 kWh | $300 |
| February | 6.58 m/s | 1,839 kWh | $295 |
| March | 6.79 m/s | 2,170 kWh | $348 |
| April | 7.06 m/s | 2,258 kWh | $362 |
| May | 6.58 m/s | 2,037 kWh | $327 |
| June | 6.18 m/s | 1,726 kWh | $277 |
| July | 5.62 m/s | 1,437 kWh | $230 |
| August | 5.33 m/s | 1,257 kWh | $201 |
| September | 5.30 m/s | 1,200 kWh | $192 |
| October | 6.10 m/s | 1,733 kWh | $278 |
| November | 6.36 m/s | 1,841 kWh | $295 |
| December | 6.32 m/s | 1,874 kWh | $300 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Menard County averages 4.88 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.95 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.220, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 17,354 to 26,685 kWh a year, 54% 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 | 5.68 m/s | 17,354 kWh | 36 years |
| 30 m | 6.21 m/s | 21,271 kWh | 29 years |
| 40 m | 6.62 m/s | 24,267 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 6.95 m/s | 26,685 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Menard County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Schleicher County, averages 6.39 m/s.
- Kimble County, TX: 6.2 m/s, 21,187 kWh, payback 29 years (29 mi)
- Concho County, TX: 6.07 m/s, 20,223 kWh, payback 31 years (30 mi)
- McCulloch County, TX: 5.98 m/s, 19,556 kWh, payback 32 years (37 mi)
- Mason County, TX: 6.08 m/s, 20,297 kWh, payback 31 years (39 mi)
- Schleicher County, TX: 6.39 m/s, 22,595 kWh, payback 28 years (40 mi)
- Sutton County, TX: 6.28 m/s, 21,781 kWh, payback 29 years (46 mi)
Sun versus wind in Menard County
Menard County gets 5.04 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,472 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,126. 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.