Wind Turbine Payback in Prowers County, CO
Wind turbine payback in Prowers 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 Prowers County, CO averages 6.15 m/s (13.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 20,816 kWh a year, worth $3,497 at CO's 16.8¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 29 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Prowers County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Prowers County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.4 m/s at the hub against 6.15 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,510 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,082, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 24¢/kWh, 1.4 times what CO pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.4 m/s instead of 6.15. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of CO
Prowers County is the 638th 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 Prowers County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.92 m/s and about 2,173 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.59 m/s and 1,418 kWh, so the best month makes 1.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 41% of the year's output in Prowers County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.83 m/s | 1,569 kWh | $264 |
| February | 6.09 m/s | 1,564 kWh | $263 |
| March | 6.46 m/s | 1,962 kWh | $330 |
| April | 6.92 m/s | 2,173 kWh | $365 |
| May | 6.36 m/s | 1,901 kWh | $319 |
| June | 6.32 m/s | 1,818 kWh | $305 |
| July | 5.69 m/s | 1,479 kWh | $248 |
| August | 5.59 m/s | 1,418 kWh | $238 |
| September | 6.23 m/s | 1,758 kWh | $295 |
| October | 6.12 m/s | 1,749 kWh | $294 |
| November | 6.19 m/s | 1,736 kWh | $292 |
| December | 5.98 m/s | 1,664 kWh | $280 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Prowers County averages 4.84 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.87 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.218, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 16,952 to 26,109 kWh a year, 54% 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 | 5.63 m/s | 16,952 kWh | 35 years |
| 30 m | 6.15 m/s | 20,787 kWh | 29 years |
| 40 m | 6.54 m/s | 23,730 kWh | 25 years |
| 50 m | 6.87 m/s | 26,109 kWh | 23 years |
Counties around Prowers County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Baca County, averages 6.65 m/s.
- Hamilton County, KS: 6.26 m/s, 21,632 kWh, payback 30 years (33 mi)
- Kiowa County, CO: 5.95 m/s, 19,334 kWh, payback 31 years (36 mi)
- Bent County, CO: 5.75 m/s, 17,859 kWh, payback 33 years (37 mi)
- Stanton County, KS: 6.44 m/s, 22,964 kWh, payback 29 years (43 mi)
- Baca County, CO: 6.65 m/s, 24,509 kWh, payback 24 years (46 mi)
- Greeley County, KS: 6.26 m/s, 21,632 kWh, payback 30 years (48 mi)
Sun versus wind in Prowers County
Prowers County gets 5.17 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,510 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,082. 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.