Wind Turbine Payback in Washoe County, NV
Wind turbine payback in Washoe 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 Washoe County, NV averages 3.61 m/s (8.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 4,778 kWh a year, worth $638 at NV's 13.36¢/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 Washoe County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Washoe County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.6 m/s at the hub against 3.61 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,451 kWh a year here against the turbine's 478, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 105¢/kWh, 7.8 times what NV pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.6 m/s instead of 3.61. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NV
Washoe County is the 2,382nd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NV is Nye County at 4.71 m/s, payback 70 years.
Month by month in Washoe County
April is the strongest month here, at 4.24 m/s and about 647 kWh. January is the weakest, 3.21 m/s and 277 kWh, so the best month makes 2.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 40% of the year's output in Washoe County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.21 m/s | 277 kWh | $37 |
| February | 3.69 m/s | 393 kWh | $53 |
| March | 4.11 m/s | 606 kWh | $81 |
| April | 4.24 m/s | 647 kWh | $86 |
| May | 4.02 m/s | 566 kWh | $76 |
| June | 3.91 m/s | 503 kWh | $67 |
| July | 3.38 m/s | 329 kWh | $44 |
| August | 3.24 m/s | 287 kWh | $38 |
| September | 3.29 m/s | 291 kWh | $39 |
| October | 3.29 m/s | 301 kWh | $40 |
| November | 3.43 m/s | 332 kWh | $44 |
| December | 3.54 m/s | 380 kWh | $51 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Washoe County averages 2.94 m/s; at 50 m it is 3.97 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.187, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 3,738 to 6,428 kWh a year, 72% 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 | 3.34 m/s | 3,738 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.61 m/s | 4,771 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.81 m/s | 5,650 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 3.97 m/s | 6,428 kWh | over 100 years |
Counties around Washoe County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Modoc County, averages 4.73 m/s.
- Lassen County, CA: 3.6 m/s, 4,736 kWh, payback 65 years (50 mi)
- Pershing County, NV: 3.52 m/s, 4,408 kWh, payback over 100 years (69 mi)
- Plumas County, CA: 3.24 m/s, 3,367 kWh, payback 91 years (80 mi)
- Modoc County, CA: 4.73 m/s, 10,762 kWh, payback 29 years (81 mi)
- Storey County, NV: 3.6 m/s, 4,736 kWh, payback over 100 years (90 mi)
- Sierra County, CA: 3.32 m/s, 3,648 kWh, payback 84 years (92 mi)
Sun versus wind in Washoe County
Washoe County gets 4.97 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,451 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 478. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 3.0 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.