Wind Turbine Payback in Wallace County, KS
Wind turbine payback in Wallace 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 Wallace County, KS averages 6.3 m/s (14.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 21,929 kWh a year, worth $3,346 at KS's 15.26¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 30 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Wallace County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Wallace County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 6.3 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,437 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,193, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 23¢/kWh, 1.5 times what KS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 6.3. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of KS
Wallace County is the 474th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in KS is Edwards County at 6.68 m/s, payback 27 years.
Month by month in Wallace County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.99 m/s and about 2,218 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.65 m/s and 1,455 kWh, so the best month makes 1.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 42% of the year's output in Wallace County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.23 m/s | 1,820 kWh | $278 |
| February | 6.32 m/s | 1,695 kWh | $259 |
| March | 6.60 m/s | 2,050 kWh | $313 |
| April | 6.99 m/s | 2,218 kWh | $338 |
| May | 6.42 m/s | 1,938 kWh | $296 |
| June | 6.21 m/s | 1,745 kWh | $266 |
| July | 5.69 m/s | 1,477 kWh | $225 |
| August | 5.65 m/s | 1,455 kWh | $222 |
| September | 6.33 m/s | 1,821 kWh | $278 |
| October | 6.43 m/s | 1,944 kWh | $297 |
| November | 6.44 m/s | 1,886 kWh | $288 |
| December | 6.26 m/s | 1,837 kWh | $280 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Wallace County averages 4.95 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.04 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.219, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 17,932 to 27,328 kWh a year, 52% 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 | 5.76 m/s | 17,932 kWh | 37 years |
| 30 m | 6.29 m/s | 21,891 kWh | 30 years |
| 40 m | 6.7 m/s | 24,905 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 7.04 m/s | 27,328 kWh | 24 years |
Counties around Wallace County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Thomas County, averages 6.38 m/s.
- Sherman County, KS: 6.28 m/s, 21,781 kWh, payback 30 years (29 mi)
- Greeley County, KS: 6.26 m/s, 21,632 kWh, payback 30 years (31 mi)
- Logan County, KS: 6.36 m/s, 22,373 kWh, payback 29 years (33 mi)
- Wichita County, KS: 6.37 m/s, 22,447 kWh, payback 29 years (38 mi)
- Cheyenne County, CO: 6.14 m/s, 20,742 kWh, payback 29 years (45 mi)
- Thomas County, KS: 6.38 m/s, 22,521 kWh, payback 29 years (47 mi)
Sun versus wind in Wallace County
Wallace County gets 4.92 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,437 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,193. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.5 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.