Wind Turbine Payback in Morgan County, CO
Wind turbine payback in Morgan 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 Morgan County, CO averages 5.37 m/s (12 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 15,105 kWh a year, worth $2,538 at CO's 16.8¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 39 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Morgan County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Morgan County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.4 m/s at the hub against 5.37 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,393 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,511, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 33¢/kWh, 2.0 times what CO pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.4 m/s instead of 5.37. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of CO
Morgan County is the 1,295th 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 Morgan County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.12 m/s and about 1,693 kWh. July is the weakest, 4.64 m/s and 864 kWh, so the best month makes 2.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 46% of the year's output in Morgan County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.60 m/s | 1,421 kWh | $239 |
| February | 5.62 m/s | 1,298 kWh | $218 |
| March | 5.92 m/s | 1,620 kWh | $272 |
| April | 6.12 m/s | 1,693 kWh | $284 |
| May | 5.36 m/s | 1,274 kWh | $214 |
| June | 5.05 m/s | 1,055 kWh | $177 |
| July | 4.64 m/s | 864 kWh | $145 |
| August | 4.70 m/s | 897 kWh | $151 |
| September | 5.01 m/s | 1,036 kWh | $174 |
| October | 5.48 m/s | 1,350 kWh | $227 |
| November | 5.45 m/s | 1,291 kWh | $217 |
| December | 5.44 m/s | 1,323 kWh | $222 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Morgan County averages 4.16 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.04 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.232, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 11,756 to 20,001 kWh a year, 70% 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 | 4.88 m/s | 11,756 kWh | 51 years |
| 30 m | 5.36 m/s | 15,069 kWh | 40 years |
| 40 m | 5.74 m/s | 17,750 kWh | 34 years |
| 50 m | 6.04 m/s | 20,001 kWh | 30 years |
Counties around Morgan County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Kimball County, averages 6.1 m/s.
- Weld County, CO: 4.95 m/s, 12,199 kWh, payback 49 years (36 mi)
- Washington County, CO: 5.98 m/s, 19,556 kWh, payback 30 years (38 mi)
- Adams County, CO: 4.87 m/s, 11,668 kWh, payback 51 years (38 mi)
- Logan County, CO: 5.89 m/s, 18,890 kWh, payback 32 years (50 mi)
- Arapahoe County, CO: 5.42 m/s, 15,462 kWh, payback 39 years (51 mi)
- Kimball County, NE: 6.1 m/s, 20,446 kWh, payback 38 years (65 mi)
Sun versus wind in Morgan County
Morgan 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 1,511. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.1 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.