Wind Turbine Payback in Otero County, CO
Wind turbine payback in Otero 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 Otero County, CO averages 5.33 m/s (11.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 14,821 kWh a year, worth $2,490 at CO's 16.8¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 40 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Otero County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Otero County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.4 m/s at the hub against 5.33 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,513 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,482, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 34¢/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 5.33. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of CO
Otero County is the 1,315th 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 Otero County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.18 m/s and about 1,727 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.66 m/s and 879 kWh, so the best month makes 2.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 43% of the year's output in Otero County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.21 m/s | 1,185 kWh | $199 |
| February | 5.38 m/s | 1,167 kWh | $196 |
| March | 5.79 m/s | 1,539 kWh | $259 |
| April | 6.18 m/s | 1,727 kWh | $290 |
| May | 5.46 m/s | 1,335 kWh | $224 |
| June | 5.38 m/s | 1,250 kWh | $210 |
| July | 4.76 m/s | 931 kWh | $156 |
| August | 4.66 m/s | 879 kWh | $148 |
| September | 5.17 m/s | 1,127 kWh | $189 |
| October | 5.24 m/s | 1,206 kWh | $203 |
| November | 5.38 m/s | 1,245 kWh | $209 |
| December | 5.34 m/s | 1,265 kWh | $213 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Otero County averages 4.15 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.99 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.228, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 11,607 to 19,630 kWh a year, 69% 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 | 4.86 m/s | 11,607 kWh | 51 years |
| 30 m | 5.33 m/s | 14,831 kWh | 40 years |
| 40 m | 5.69 m/s | 17,440 kWh | 34 years |
| 50 m | 5.99 m/s | 19,630 kWh | 30 years |
Counties around Otero County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Las Animas County, averages 6.19 m/s.
- Crowley County, CO: 5.2 m/s, 13,907 kWh, payback 43 years (29 mi)
- Bent County, CO: 5.75 m/s, 17,859 kWh, payback 33 years (35 mi)
- Las Animas County, CO: 6.19 m/s, 21,113 kWh, payback 28 years (43 mi)
- Pueblo County, CO: 5.18 m/s, 13,768 kWh, payback 43 years (46 mi)
- Kiowa County, CO: 5.95 m/s, 19,334 kWh, payback 31 years (63 mi)
- Huerfano County, CO: 5.51 m/s, 16,109 kWh, payback 37 years (69 mi)
Sun versus wind in Otero County
Otero County gets 5.18 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,513 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,482. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.0 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.