Wind Turbine Payback in Walker County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Walker 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 Walker County, TX averages 3.83 m/s (8.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 5,753 kWh a year, worth $922 at TX's 16.03¢/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 Walker County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Walker County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 3.83 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,358 kWh a year here against the turbine's 575, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 87¢/kWh, 5.4 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 3.83. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Walker County is the 2,190th 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 Walker County
April is the strongest month here, at 4.41 m/s and about 722 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.08 m/s and 242 kWh, so the best month makes 3.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 52% of the year's output in Walker County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.12 m/s | 609 kWh | $98 |
| February | 4.24 m/s | 602 kWh | $97 |
| March | 4.31 m/s | 698 kWh | $112 |
| April | 4.41 m/s | 722 kWh | $116 |
| May | 4.04 m/s | 577 kWh | $92 |
| June | 3.45 m/s | 338 kWh | $54 |
| July | 3.14 m/s | 257 kWh | $41 |
| August | 3.08 m/s | 242 kWh | $39 |
| September | 3.26 m/s | 283 kWh | $45 |
| October | 3.75 m/s | 458 kWh | $73 |
| November | 4.03 m/s | 551 kWh | $88 |
| December | 4.12 m/s | 609 kWh | $98 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Walker County averages 2.55 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.62 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.369, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 3,558 to 10,070 kWh a year, 183% 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 | 3.29 m/s | 3,558 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.83 m/s | 5,736 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 4.25 m/s | 7,924 kWh | 79 years |
| 50 m | 4.62 m/s | 10,070 kWh | 62 years |
Counties around Walker County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Grimes County, averages 4.94 m/s.
- Madison County, TX: 4.35 m/s, 8,460 kWh, payback 74 years (26 mi)
- San Jacinto County, TX: 3.21 m/s, 3,265 kWh, payback over 100 years (27 mi)
- Grimes County, TX: 4.94 m/s, 12,132 kWh, payback 51 years (28 mi)
- Montgomery County, TX: 3.83 m/s, 5,753 kWh, payback over 100 years (31 mi)
- Trinity County, TX: 3.3 m/s, 3,577 kWh, payback over 100 years (35 mi)
- Houston County, TX: 4.53 m/s, 9,519 kWh, payback 66 years (41 mi)
Sun versus wind in Walker County
Walker County gets 4.65 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,358 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 575. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.4 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.