Wind Turbine Payback in San Miguel County, CO
Wind turbine payback in San Miguel 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 San Miguel County, CO averages 3.84 m/s (8.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 5,800 kWh a year, worth $974 at CO's 16.8¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of over 100 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in San Miguel County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in San Miguel County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.4 m/s at the hub against 3.84 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,483 kWh a year here against the turbine's 580, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 86¢/kWh, 5.1 times what CO pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.4 m/s instead of 3.84. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of CO
San Miguel County is the 2,186th 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 San Miguel County
April is the strongest month here, at 4.70 m/s and about 869 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.13 m/s and 254 kWh, so the best month makes 3.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 40% of the year's output in San Miguel County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.45 m/s | 351 kWh | $59 |
| February | 3.98 m/s | 497 kWh | $83 |
| March | 4.20 m/s | 646 kWh | $109 |
| April | 4.70 m/s | 869 kWh | $146 |
| May | 4.28 m/s | 687 kWh | $115 |
| June | 4.29 m/s | 669 kWh | $112 |
| July | 3.15 m/s | 262 kWh | $44 |
| August | 3.13 m/s | 254 kWh | $43 |
| September | 3.63 m/s | 400 kWh | $67 |
| October | 3.79 m/s | 472 kWh | $79 |
| November | 3.84 m/s | 477 kWh | $80 |
| December | 3.66 m/s | 423 kWh | $71 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in San Miguel County averages 2.84 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.42 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.275, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 4,077 to 8,865 kWh a year, 117% 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 | 3.44 m/s | 4,077 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.84 m/s | 5,804 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 4.16 m/s | 7,391 kWh | 81 years |
| 50 m | 4.42 m/s | 8,865 kWh | 67 years |
Counties around San Miguel County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Dolores County, averages 4.23 m/s.
- Dolores County, CO: 4.23 m/s, 7,787 kWh, payback 76 years (20 mi)
- Montrose County, CO: 3.93 m/s, 6,231 kWh, payback 96 years (29 mi)
- Ouray County, CO: 3.36 m/s, 3,794 kWh, payback over 100 years (36 mi)
- San Juan County, CO: 3.36 m/s, 3,794 kWh, payback over 100 years (44 mi)
- Montezuma County, CO: 4.23 m/s, 7,787 kWh, payback 76 years (47 mi)
- Hinsdale County, CO: 3.36 m/s, 3,794 kWh, payback over 100 years (58 mi)
Sun versus wind in San Miguel County
San Miguel County gets 5.08 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,483 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 580. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.6 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.