Wind Turbine Payback in Woodward County, OK
Wind turbine payback in Woodward 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 Woodward County, OK averages 6.69 m/s (15 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 24,801 kWh a year, worth $3,425 at OK's 13.81¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 29 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Woodward County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Woodward County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.4 m/s at the hub against 6.69 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,442 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,480, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 20¢/kWh, 1.5 times what OK pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.4 m/s instead of 6.69. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of OK
Woodward County is the 65th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in OK is Cimarron County at 6.82 m/s, payback 28 years.
Month by month in Woodward County
April is the strongest month here, at 7.60 m/s and about 2,566 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.91 m/s and 1,619 kWh, so the best month makes 1.6 times the worst. November to March brings in 41% of the year's output in Woodward County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.49 m/s | 1,980 kWh | $273 |
| February | 6.53 m/s | 1,814 kWh | $251 |
| March | 7.11 m/s | 2,362 kWh | $326 |
| April | 7.60 m/s | 2,566 kWh | $354 |
| May | 6.94 m/s | 2,258 kWh | $312 |
| June | 6.98 m/s | 2,212 kWh | $305 |
| July | 6.09 m/s | 1,732 kWh | $239 |
| August | 5.91 m/s | 1,619 kWh | $224 |
| September | 6.51 m/s | 1,933 kWh | $267 |
| October | 6.80 m/s | 2,176 kWh | $301 |
| November | 6.86 m/s | 2,138 kWh | $295 |
| December | 6.50 m/s | 1,986 kWh | $274 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Woodward County averages 5.3 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.46 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.212, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 20,764 to 30,263 kWh a year, 46% 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 | 6.14 m/s | 20,764 kWh | 35 years |
| 30 m | 6.69 m/s | 24,833 kWh | 29 years |
| 40 m | 7.12 m/s | 27,863 kWh | 26 years |
| 50 m | 7.46 m/s | 30,263 kWh | 24 years |
Counties around Woodward County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Ellis County, averages 6.76 m/s.
- Ellis County, OK: 6.76 m/s, 25,311 kWh, payback 29 years (30 mi)
- Woods County, OK: 6.46 m/s, 23,112 kWh, payback 31 years (31 mi)
- Harper County, OK: 6.38 m/s, 22,521 kWh, payback 32 years (34 mi)
- Dewey County, OK: 6.62 m/s, 24,289 kWh, payback 30 years (34 mi)
- Major County, OK: 6.46 m/s, 23,112 kWh, payback 31 years (41 mi)
- Comanche County, KS: 6.38 m/s, 22,521 kWh, payback 29 years (52 mi)
Sun versus wind in Woodward County
Woodward County gets 4.94 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,442 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,480. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.7 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.