Wind Turbine Payback in Wichita County, TX
Wind turbine payback in Wichita 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 Wichita County, TX averages 5.95 m/s (13.3 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 19,334 kWh a year, worth $3,099 at TX's 16.03¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 32 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Wichita County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Wichita County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.6 m/s at the hub against 5.95 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,451 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,933, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 26¢/kWh, 1.6 times what TX pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.6 m/s instead of 5.95. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TX
Wichita County is the 914th 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 Wichita County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.94 m/s and about 2,188 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.03 m/s and 1,085 kWh, so the best month makes 2.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 44% of the year's output in Wichita County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.92 m/s | 1,624 kWh | $260 |
| February | 6.10 m/s | 1,568 kWh | $251 |
| March | 6.50 m/s | 1,986 kWh | $318 |
| April | 6.94 m/s | 2,188 kWh | $351 |
| May | 6.34 m/s | 1,886 kWh | $302 |
| June | 6.00 m/s | 1,620 kWh | $260 |
| July | 5.25 m/s | 1,209 kWh | $194 |
| August | 5.03 m/s | 1,085 kWh | $174 |
| September | 5.27 m/s | 1,181 kWh | $189 |
| October | 5.99 m/s | 1,669 kWh | $268 |
| November | 6.24 m/s | 1,766 kWh | $283 |
| December | 5.87 m/s | 1,591 kWh | $255 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Wichita County averages 4.59 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.71 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.236, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 15,356 to 24,947 kWh a year, 62% 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 | 5.41 m/s | 15,356 kWh | 41 years |
| 30 m | 5.95 m/s | 19,319 kWh | 32 years |
| 40 m | 6.37 m/s | 22,416 kWh | 28 years |
| 50 m | 6.71 m/s | 24,947 kWh | 25 years |
Counties around Wichita County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Baylor County, averages 6.09 m/s.
- Archer County, TX: 6.03 m/s, 19,926 kWh, payback 31 years (26 mi)
- Cotton County, OK: 6.06 m/s, 20,149 kWh, payback 36 years (28 mi)
- Tillman County, OK: 6.07 m/s, 20,223 kWh, payback 36 years (29 mi)
- Wilbarger County, TX: 6.03 m/s, 19,926 kWh, payback 31 years (31 mi)
- Clay County, TX: 5.94 m/s, 19,260 kWh, payback 32 years (32 mi)
- Baylor County, TX: 6.09 m/s, 20,371 kWh, payback 31 years (38 mi)
Sun versus wind in Wichita County
Wichita 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 1,933. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.3 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.