Wind Turbine Payback in Richland Parish, LA
Wind turbine payback in Richland Parish
No. The turbine wears out before it pays for itself.
At 30 m, the height a home turbine tower usually reaches, the wind in Richland Parish, LA averages 4.65 m/s (10.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 10,257 kWh a year, worth $1,361 at LA's 13.27¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 74 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Richland Parish
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Richland Parish unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.6 m/s at the hub against 4.65 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,352 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,026, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 49¢/kWh, 3.7 times what LA pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.6 m/s instead of 4.65. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of LA
Richland Parish is the 1,659th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in LA is Iberia Parish at 5.86 m/s, payback 40 years.
Month by month in Richland Parish
March is the strongest month here, at 5.39 m/s and about 1,297 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.62 m/s and 409 kWh, so the best month makes 3.2 times the worst. November to March brings in 53% of the year's output in Richland Parish.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.11 m/s | 1,131 kWh | $150 |
| February | 5.29 m/s | 1,114 kWh | $148 |
| March | 5.39 m/s | 1,297 kWh | $172 |
| April | 5.45 m/s | 1,291 kWh | $171 |
| May | 4.71 m/s | 906 kWh | $120 |
| June | 4.04 m/s | 556 kWh | $74 |
| July | 3.62 m/s | 409 kWh | $54 |
| August | 3.68 m/s | 431 kWh | $57 |
| September | 4.17 m/s | 612 kWh | $81 |
| October | 4.53 m/s | 809 kWh | $107 |
| November | 4.92 m/s | 988 kWh | $131 |
| December | 5.05 m/s | 1,096 kWh | $145 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Richland Parish averages 3.45 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.35 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.273, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 7,440 to 14,963 kWh a year, 101% 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 | 4.17 m/s | 7,440 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.65 m/s | 10,280 kWh | 73 years |
| 40 m | 5.03 m/s | 12,763 kWh | 59 years |
| 50 m | 5.35 m/s | 14,963 kWh | 50 years |
Counties around Richland Parish
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, West Carroll Parish, averages 4.9 m/s.
- Franklin Parish, LA: 4.29 m/s, 8,120 kWh, payback 93 years (19 mi)
- Ouachita Parish, LA: 4.65 m/s, 10,257 kWh, payback 74 years (24 mi)
- Morehouse Parish, LA: 3.7 m/s, 5,164 kWh, payback over 100 years (28 mi)
- Caldwell Parish, LA: 4.29 m/s, 8,120 kWh, payback 93 years (30 mi)
- Madison Parish, LA: 4.77 m/s, 11,018 kWh, payback 68 years (30 mi)
- West Carroll Parish, LA: 4.9 m/s, 11,866 kWh, payback 64 years (31 mi)
Sun versus wind in Richland Parish
Richland Parish gets 4.63 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,352 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,026. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.3 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.