Wind Turbine Payback in Ward County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Ward 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 Ward County, TX averages 5.53 m/s (12.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 16,254 kWh a year, worth $2,605 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 38 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Ward County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Ward County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 5.53 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,641 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,625, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 31¢/kWh, 1.9 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 5.53. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Ward County is the 1,195th 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 Ward County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.29 m/s and about 1,794 kWh. September is the weakest, 5.10 m/s and 1,084 kWh, so the best month makes 1.7 times the worst. November to March brings in 41% of the year's output in Ward County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.39 m/s | 1,296 kWh | $208 |
| February | 5.76 m/s | 1,375 kWh | $220 |
| March | 5.92 m/s | 1,623 kWh | $260 |
| April | 6.29 m/s | 1,794 kWh | $288 |
| May | 5.88 m/s | 1,600 kWh | $256 |
| June | 5.84 m/s | 1,522 kWh | $244 |
| July | 5.49 m/s | 1,356 kWh | $217 |
| August | 5.08 m/s | 1,110 kWh | $178 |
| September | 5.10 m/s | 1,084 kWh | $174 |
| October | 5.23 m/s | 1,199 kWh | $192 |
| November | 5.21 m/s | 1,150 kWh | $184 |
| December | 5.31 m/s | 1,247 kWh | $200 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Ward County averages 4.35 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.19 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 12,973 to 21,113 kWh a year, 63% 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 | 5.06 m/s | 12,973 kWh | 48 years |
| 30 m | 5.53 m/s | 16,289 kWh | 38 years |
| 40 m | 5.89 m/s | 18,925 kWh | 33 years |
| 50 m | 6.19 m/s | 21,113 kWh | 30 years |
Counties around Ward County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Pecos County, averages 6.32 m/s.
- Winkler County, TX: 5.77 m/s, 18,006 kWh, payback 35 years (22 mi)
- Loving County, TX: 5.4 m/s, 15,319 kWh, payback 41 years (35 mi)
- Crane County, TX: 6.06 m/s, 20,149 kWh, payback 31 years (37 mi)
- Reeves County, TX: 5.48 m/s, 15,893 kWh, payback 39 years (39 mi)
- Ector County, TX: 6.12 m/s, 20,594 kWh, payback 30 years (41 mi)
- Pecos County, TX: 6.32 m/s, 22,077 kWh, payback 28 years (56 mi)
Sun versus wind in Ward County
Ward County gets 5.62 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,641 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,625. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.0 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.