Wind Turbine Payback in Navajo County, AZ
Wind turbine payback in Navajo 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 Navajo County, AZ averages 4.66 m/s (10.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 10,320 kWh a year, worth $1,585 at AZ's 15.36¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 63 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Navajo County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Navajo County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.66 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,647 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,032, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 48¢/kWh, 3.2 times what AZ pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.66. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of AZ
Navajo County is the 1,645th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in AZ is Apache County at 5.25 m/s, payback 46 years.
Month by month in Navajo County
April is the strongest month here, at 5.77 m/s and about 1,480 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.54 m/s and 381 kWh, so the best month makes 3.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 42% of the year's output in Navajo County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.44 m/s | 761 kWh | $117 |
| February | 4.91 m/s | 914 kWh | $140 |
| March | 5.20 m/s | 1,182 kWh | $182 |
| April | 5.77 m/s | 1,480 kWh | $227 |
| May | 5.25 m/s | 1,208 kWh | $186 |
| June | 5.03 m/s | 1,048 kWh | $161 |
| July | 3.93 m/s | 529 kWh | $81 |
| August | 3.54 m/s | 381 kWh | $59 |
| September | 4.18 m/s | 617 kWh | $95 |
| October | 4.68 m/s | 885 kWh | $136 |
| November | 4.68 m/s | 857 kWh | $132 |
| December | 4.39 m/s | 739 kWh | $114 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Navajo County averages 3.62 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.24 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.230, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 7,866 to 14,186 kWh a year, 80% 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 | 4.24 m/s | 7,866 kWh | 83 years |
| 30 m | 4.66 m/s | 10,314 kWh | 63 years |
| 40 m | 4.98 m/s | 12,385 kWh | 53 years |
| 50 m | 5.24 m/s | 14,186 kWh | 46 years |
Counties around Navajo County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Cibola County, averages 5.8 m/s.
- Apache County, AZ: 5.25 m/s, 14,256 kWh, payback 46 years (47 mi)
- Coconino County, AZ: 4.27 m/s, 8,008 kWh, payback 81 years (87 mi)
- Gila County, AZ: 4.05 m/s, 6,831 kWh, payback 95 years (114 mi)
- McKinley County, NM: 5.51 m/s, 16,109 kWh, payback 41 years (117 mi)
- Cibola County, NM: 5.8 m/s, 18,226 kWh, payback 36 years (135 mi)
- San Juan County, NM: 4.56 m/s, 9,702 kWh, payback 67 years (136 mi)
Sun versus wind in Navajo County
Navajo County gets 5.64 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,647 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,032. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.6 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.