Wind Turbine Payback in Randall County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Randall 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 Randall County, TX averages 6.6 m/s (14.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 24,142 kWh a year, worth $3,870 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 26 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Randall County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Randall County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 6.6 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,545 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,414, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 21¢/kWh, 1.3 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 6.6. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Randall County is the 114th 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 Randall County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.51 m/s and about 2,513 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.64 m/s and 1,446 kWh, so the best month makes 1.7 times the worst. November to March brings in 44% of the year's output in Randall County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.62 m/s | 2,063 kWh | $331 |
| February | 6.84 m/s | 1,988 kWh | $319 |
| March | 7.06 m/s | 2,332 kWh | $374 |
| April | 7.51 m/s | 2,513 kWh | $403 |
| May | 6.77 m/s | 2,157 kWh | $346 |
| June | 6.70 m/s | 2,045 kWh | $328 |
| July | 5.85 m/s | 1,580 kWh | $253 |
| August | 5.64 m/s | 1,446 kWh | $232 |
| September | 6.08 m/s | 1,670 kWh | $268 |
| October | 6.60 m/s | 2,052 kWh | $329 |
| November | 6.86 m/s | 2,141 kWh | $343 |
| December | 6.72 m/s | 2,124 kWh | $340 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Randall County averages 5.2 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.38 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 20,028 to 29,714 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 | 6.04 m/s | 20,028 kWh | 31 years |
| 30 m | 6.6 m/s | 24,159 kWh | 26 years |
| 40 m | 7.03 m/s | 27,254 kWh | 23 years |
| 50 m | 7.38 m/s | 29,714 kWh | 21 years |
Counties around Randall County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Carson County, averages 6.7 m/s.
- Potter County, TX: 6.55 m/s, 23,775 kWh, payback 26 years (30 mi)
- Armstrong County, TX: 6.44 m/s, 22,964 kWh, payback 27 years (31 mi)
- Swisher County, TX: 6.48 m/s, 23,260 kWh, payback 27 years (31 mi)
- Castro County, TX: 6.39 m/s, 22,595 kWh, payback 28 years (36 mi)
- Deaf Smith County, TX: 6.63 m/s, 24,362 kWh, payback 26 years (40 mi)
- Carson County, TX: 6.7 m/s, 24,874 kWh, payback 25 years (43 mi)
Sun versus wind in Randall County
Randall County gets 5.29 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,545 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,414. 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.