Wind Turbine Payback in Montrose County, CO
Wind turbine payback in Montrose 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 Montrose County, CO averages 3.93 m/s (8.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 6,231 kWh a year, worth $1,047 at CO's 16.8¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 96 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Montrose County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Montrose County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.4 m/s at the hub against 3.93 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,483 kWh a year here against the turbine's 623, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 80¢/kWh, 4.8 times what CO pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.4 m/s instead of 3.93. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of CO
Montrose County is the 2,112th 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 Montrose County
April is the strongest month here, at 4.71 m/s and about 874 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.33 m/s and 313 kWh, so the best month makes 2.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 40% of the year's output in Montrose County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.57 m/s | 393 kWh | $66 |
| February | 4.15 m/s | 564 kWh | $95 |
| March | 4.34 m/s | 715 kWh | $120 |
| April | 4.71 m/s | 874 kWh | $147 |
| May | 4.28 m/s | 686 kWh | $115 |
| June | 4.41 m/s | 725 kWh | $122 |
| July | 3.42 m/s | 340 kWh | $57 |
| August | 3.33 m/s | 313 kWh | $53 |
| September | 3.71 m/s | 426 kWh | $72 |
| October | 3.83 m/s | 488 kWh | $82 |
| November | 3.84 m/s | 475 kWh | $80 |
| December | 3.71 m/s | 441 kWh | $74 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Montrose County averages 2.94 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.5 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.264, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 4,461 to 9,339 kWh a year, 109% 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 | 3.53 m/s | 4,461 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.93 m/s | 6,242 kWh | 95 years |
| 40 m | 4.24 m/s | 7,856 kWh | 76 years |
| 50 m | 4.5 m/s | 9,339 kWh | 64 years |
Counties around Montrose County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Mesa County, averages 4.25 m/s.
- San Miguel County, CO: 3.84 m/s, 5,800 kWh, payback over 100 years (29 mi)
- Ouray County, CO: 3.36 m/s, 3,794 kWh, payback over 100 years (31 mi)
- Delta County, CO: 3.66 m/s, 4,991 kWh, payback over 100 years (38 mi)
- Mesa County, CO: 4.25 m/s, 7,897 kWh, payback 75 years (44 mi)
- Dolores County, CO: 4.23 m/s, 7,787 kWh, payback 76 years (48 mi)
- San Juan County, CO: 3.36 m/s, 3,794 kWh, payback over 100 years (54 mi)
Sun versus wind in Montrose County
Montrose County gets 5.08 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,483 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 623. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.4 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.