Wind Turbine Payback in Newton County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Newton 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 Newton County, TX averages 3.18 m/s (7.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 3,165 kWh a year, worth $507 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of over 100 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Newton County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Newton County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 3.18 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,334 kWh a year here against the turbine's 317, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 158¢/kWh, 9.9 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 3.18. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Newton County is the 2,904th 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 Newton County
April is the strongest month here, at 3.68 m/s and about 417 kWh. July is the weakest, 2.56 m/s and 126 kWh, so the best month makes 3.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 51% of the year's output in Newton County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.39 m/s | 332 kWh | $53 |
| February | 3.49 m/s | 328 kWh | $53 |
| March | 3.58 m/s | 396 kWh | $63 |
| April | 3.68 m/s | 417 kWh | $67 |
| May | 3.33 m/s | 312 kWh | $50 |
| June | 2.84 m/s | 177 kWh | $28 |
| July | 2.56 m/s | 126 kWh | $20 |
| August | 2.61 m/s | 135 kWh | $22 |
| September | 2.87 m/s | 183 kWh | $29 |
| October | 3.18 m/s | 268 kWh | $43 |
| November | 3.35 m/s | 309 kWh | $50 |
| December | 3.39 m/s | 332 kWh | $53 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Newton County averages 1.95 m/s; at 50 m it is 4 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.446, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 1,698 to 6,577 kWh a year, 287% 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 | 2.66 m/s | 1,698 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.19 m/s | 3,182 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.62 m/s | 4,825 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 4 m/s | 6,577 kWh | 95 years |
Counties around Newton County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Calcasieu Parish, averages 5.34 m/s.
- Jasper County, TX: 3.18 m/s, 3,165 kWh, payback over 100 years (17 mi)
- Beauregard Parish, LA: 3.83 m/s, 5,753 kWh, payback over 100 years (26 mi)
- Tyler County, TX: 3.18 m/s, 3,165 kWh, payback over 100 years (38 mi)
- Sabine County, TX: 3.27 m/s, 3,471 kWh, payback over 100 years (39 mi)
- Vernon Parish, LA: 3.17 m/s, 3,132 kWh, payback over 100 years (39 mi)
- Calcasieu Parish, LA: 5.34 m/s, 14,892 kWh, payback 51 years (45 mi)
Sun versus wind in Newton County
Newton County gets 4.57 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,334 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 317. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 4.2 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.