Wind Turbine Payback in Wilson County, KS
Wind turbine payback in Wilson 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 Wilson County, KS averages 6.09 m/s (13.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 20,371 kWh a year, worth $3,109 at KS's 15.26¢/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 Wilson County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Wilson County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 6.09 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,294 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,037, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 25¢/kWh, 1.6 times what KS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 6.09. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of KS
Wilson County is the 701st 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 Wilson County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.17 m/s and about 2,320 kWh. August is the weakest, 4.86 m/s and 988 kWh, so the best month makes 2.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 47% of the year's output in Wilson County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.33 m/s | 1,879 kWh | $287 |
| February | 6.44 m/s | 1,762 kWh | $269 |
| March | 6.87 m/s | 2,215 kWh | $338 |
| April | 7.17 m/s | 2,320 kWh | $354 |
| May | 6.18 m/s | 1,789 kWh | $273 |
| June | 5.79 m/s | 1,495 kWh | $228 |
| July | 4.92 m/s | 1,017 kWh | $155 |
| August | 4.86 m/s | 988 kWh | $151 |
| September | 5.40 m/s | 1,262 kWh | $193 |
| October | 6.30 m/s | 1,862 kWh | $284 |
| November | 6.58 m/s | 1,974 kWh | $301 |
| December | 6.27 m/s | 1,845 kWh | $282 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Wilson County averages 4.69 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.87 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.237, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 16,246 to 26,109 kWh a year, 61% 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 | 5.53 m/s | 16,246 kWh | 40 years |
| 30 m | 6.09 m/s | 20,347 kWh | 32 years |
| 40 m | 6.52 m/s | 23,526 kWh | 28 years |
| 50 m | 6.87 m/s | 26,109 kWh | 25 years |
Counties around Wilson County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Greenwood County, averages 6.33 m/s.
- Woodson County, KS: 6.18 m/s, 21,039 kWh, payback 31 years (23 mi)
- Neosho County, KS: 6.09 m/s, 20,371 kWh, payback 32 years (24 mi)
- Montgomery County, KS: 6.03 m/s, 19,926 kWh, payback 33 years (25 mi)
- Elk County, KS: 6.26 m/s, 21,632 kWh, payback 30 years (28 mi)
- Allen County, KS: 6.03 m/s, 19,926 kWh, payback 33 years (33 mi)
- Greenwood County, KS: 6.33 m/s, 22,151 kWh, payback 30 years (35 mi)
Sun versus wind in Wilson County
Wilson County gets 4.43 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,294 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,037. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.6 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.