Wind Turbine Payback in Pawnee County, OK
Wind turbine payback in Pawnee 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 Pawnee County, OK averages 6.21 m/s (13.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,262 kWh a year, worth $2,936 at OK's 13.81¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 34 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Pawnee County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Pawnee County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.4 m/s at the hub against 6.21 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,334 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,126, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 24¢/kWh, 1.7 times what OK pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.4 m/s instead of 6.21. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OK
Pawnee County is the 576th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in OK is Cimarron County at 6.82 m/s, payback 28 years.
Month by month in Pawnee County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.24 m/s and about 2,361 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.16 m/s and 1,156 kWh, so the best month makes 2.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 45% of the year's output in Pawnee County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.24 m/s | 1,826 kWh | $252 |
| February | 6.39 m/s | 1,735 kWh | $240 |
| March | 6.86 m/s | 2,208 kWh | $305 |
| April | 7.24 m/s | 2,361 kWh | $326 |
| May | 6.37 m/s | 1,904 kWh | $263 |
| June | 6.13 m/s | 1,696 kWh | $234 |
| July | 5.28 m/s | 1,230 kWh | $170 |
| August | 5.16 m/s | 1,156 kWh | $160 |
| September | 5.64 m/s | 1,400 kWh | $193 |
| October | 6.41 m/s | 1,932 kWh | $267 |
| November | 6.62 m/s | 1,999 kWh | $276 |
| December | 6.24 m/s | 1,826 kWh | $252 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Pawnee County averages 4.82 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.98 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 17,153 to 26,900 kWh a year, 57% 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 | 5.65 m/s | 17,153 kWh | 42 years |
| 30 m | 6.21 m/s | 21,234 kWh | 34 years |
| 40 m | 6.63 m/s | 24,368 kWh | 30 years |
| 50 m | 6.98 m/s | 26,900 kWh | 27 years |
Counties around Pawnee County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Kay County, averages 6.29 m/s.
- Payne County, OK: 6.25 m/s, 21,558 kWh, payback 34 years (22 mi)
- Osage County, OK: 6.16 m/s, 20,891 kWh, payback 35 years (27 mi)
- Noble County, OK: 6.23 m/s, 21,410 kWh, payback 34 years (30 mi)
- Creek County, OK: 6.16 m/s, 20,891 kWh, payback 35 years (33 mi)
- Kay County, OK: 6.29 m/s, 21,855 kWh, payback 33 years (43 mi)
- Lincoln County, OK: 6.24 m/s, 21,484 kWh, payback 34 years (43 mi)
Sun versus wind in Pawnee County
Pawnee 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 2,126. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.6 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.