Wind Turbine Payback in Wagoner County, OK
Wind turbine payback in Wagoner 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 Wagoner County, OK averages 5.47 m/s (12.2 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 15,821 kWh a year, worth $2,185 at OK's 13.81¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 46 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Wagoner County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Wagoner County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.4 m/s at the hub against 5.47 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,314 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,582, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 32¢/kWh, 2.3 times what OK pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.4 m/s instead of 5.47. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OK
Wagoner County is the 1,240th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in OK is Cimarron County at 6.82 m/s, payback 28 years.
Month by month in Wagoner County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.41 m/s and about 1,869 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.30 m/s and 694 kWh, so the best month makes 2.7 times the worst. November to March brings in 50% of the year's output in Wagoner County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.81 m/s | 1,557 kWh | $215 |
| February | 5.99 m/s | 1,505 kWh | $208 |
| March | 6.28 m/s | 1,849 kWh | $255 |
| April | 6.41 m/s | 1,869 kWh | $258 |
| May | 5.59 m/s | 1,415 kWh | $195 |
| June | 5.07 m/s | 1,069 kWh | $148 |
| July | 4.35 m/s | 719 kWh | $99 |
| August | 4.30 m/s | 694 kWh | $96 |
| September | 4.69 m/s | 865 kWh | $119 |
| October | 5.55 m/s | 1,394 kWh | $193 |
| November | 5.96 m/s | 1,597 kWh | $221 |
| December | 5.71 m/s | 1,491 kWh | $206 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Wagoner County averages 4.11 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.25 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.260, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 12,033 to 21,558 kWh a year, 79% 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 | 4.93 m/s | 12,033 kWh | 60 years |
| 30 m | 5.47 m/s | 15,840 kWh | 46 years |
| 40 m | 5.9 m/s | 18,947 kWh | 38 years |
| 50 m | 6.25 m/s | 21,558 kWh | 34 years |
Counties around Wagoner County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Tulsa County, averages 6.16 m/s.
- Muskogee County, OK: 5.63 m/s, 16,980 kWh, payback 43 years (25 mi)
- Tulsa County, OK: 6.16 m/s, 20,891 kWh, payback 35 years (26 mi)
- Mayes County, OK: 5.2 m/s, 13,907 kWh, payback 52 years (28 mi)
- Rogers County, OK: 5.9 m/s, 18,964 kWh, payback 38 years (29 mi)
- Cherokee County, OK: 4.28 m/s, 8,064 kWh, payback 90 years (29 mi)
- Okmulgee County, OK: 6.11 m/s, 20,520 kWh, payback 35 years (34 mi)
Sun versus wind in Wagoner County
Wagoner County gets 4.5 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,314 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,582. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.2 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.