Wind Turbine Payback in Pinal County, AZ
Wind turbine payback in Pinal 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 Pinal County, AZ averages 4.22 m/s (9.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 7,732 kWh a year, worth $1,188 at AZ's 15.36¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 84 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Pinal County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Pinal County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.22 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,717 kWh a year here against the turbine's 773, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 65¢/kWh, 4.2 times what AZ pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.22. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of AZ
Pinal County is the 1,935th 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 Pinal County
January is the strongest month here, at 4.78 m/s and about 942 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.21 m/s and 277 kWh, so the best month makes 3.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 52% of the year's output in Pinal County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.78 m/s | 942 kWh | $145 |
| February | 4.36 m/s | 654 kWh | $100 |
| March | 4.33 m/s | 711 kWh | $109 |
| April | 4.50 m/s | 765 kWh | $118 |
| May | 4.29 m/s | 690 kWh | $106 |
| June | 4.05 m/s | 561 kWh | $86 |
| July | 3.53 m/s | 378 kWh | $58 |
| August | 3.21 m/s | 277 kWh | $43 |
| September | 3.92 m/s | 509 kWh | $78 |
| October | 4.26 m/s | 677 kWh | $104 |
| November | 4.76 m/s | 902 kWh | $139 |
| December | 4.68 m/s | 889 kWh | $137 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Pinal County averages 3.31 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.72 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.220, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 5,886 to 10,698 kWh a year, 82% 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 | 3.86 m/s | 5,886 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.22 m/s | 7,723 kWh | 84 years |
| 40 m | 4.49 m/s | 9,302 kWh | 70 years |
| 50 m | 4.72 m/s | 10,698 kWh | 61 years |
Counties around Pinal County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Cochise County, averages 4.69 m/s.
- Pima County, AZ: 4.58 m/s, 9,824 kWh, payback 66 years (60 mi)
- Gila County, AZ: 4.05 m/s, 6,831 kWh, payback 95 years (68 mi)
- Maricopa County, AZ: 4.09 m/s, 7,038 kWh, payback 93 years (72 mi)
- Graham County, AZ: 4.09 m/s, 7,038 kWh, payback 93 years (86 mi)
- Santa Cruz County, AZ: 4.65 m/s, 10,257 kWh, payback 64 years (101 mi)
- Cochise County, AZ: 4.69 m/s, 10,508 kWh, payback 62 years (119 mi)
Sun versus wind in Pinal County
Pinal County gets 5.88 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,717 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 773. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.2 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.