Wind Turbine Payback in Pecos County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Pecos 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 Pecos County, TX averages 6.32 m/s (14.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 22,077 kWh a year, worth $3,539 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 28 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Pecos County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Pecos County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 6.32 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,621 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,208, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 23¢/kWh, 1.4 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 6.32. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Pecos County is the 452nd 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 Pecos County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.97 m/s and about 2,203 kWh. September is the weakest, 5.79 m/s and 1,491 kWh, so the best month makes 1.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 41% of the year's output in Pecos County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.13 m/s | 1,755 kWh | $281 |
| February | 6.48 m/s | 1,785 kWh | $286 |
| March | 6.61 m/s | 2,055 kWh | $329 |
| April | 6.97 m/s | 2,203 kWh | $353 |
| May | 6.69 m/s | 2,105 kWh | $337 |
| June | 6.75 m/s | 2,075 kWh | $333 |
| July | 6.28 m/s | 1,852 kWh | $297 |
| August | 5.90 m/s | 1,608 kWh | $258 |
| September | 5.79 m/s | 1,491 kWh | $239 |
| October | 6.09 m/s | 1,733 kWh | $278 |
| November | 6.04 m/s | 1,644 kWh | $264 |
| December | 6.10 m/s | 1,738 kWh | $279 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Pecos County averages 5.04 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.02 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.206, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 18,318 to 27,186 kWh a year, 48% 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 | 5.81 m/s | 18,318 kWh | 34 years |
| 30 m | 6.32 m/s | 22,068 kWh | 28 years |
| 40 m | 6.7 m/s | 24,908 kWh | 25 years |
| 50 m | 7.02 m/s | 27,186 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Pecos County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Upton County, averages 6.37 m/s.
- Crane County, TX: 6.06 m/s, 20,149 kWh, payback 31 years (47 mi)
- Terrell County, TX: 5.56 m/s, 16,471 kWh, payback 38 years (54 mi)
- Ward County, TX: 5.53 m/s, 16,254 kWh, payback 38 years (56 mi)
- Upton County, TX: 6.37 m/s, 22,447 kWh, payback 28 years (57 mi)
- Reeves County, TX: 5.48 m/s, 15,893 kWh, payback 39 years (70 mi)
- Brewster County, TX: 5.11 m/s, 13,284 kWh, payback 47 years (74 mi)
Sun versus wind in Pecos County
Pecos County gets 5.55 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,621 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,208. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.4 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.