Wind Turbine Payback in Yavapai County, AZ
Wind turbine payback in Yavapai 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 Yavapai County, AZ averages 4.44 m/s (9.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 8,982 kWh a year, worth $1,380 at AZ's 15.36¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 73 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Yavapai County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Yavapai County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.44 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,664 kWh a year here against the turbine's 898, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 56¢/kWh, 3.6 times what AZ pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.44. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of AZ
Yavapai County is the 1,788th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in AZ is Apache County at 5.25 m/s, payback 46 years.
Month by month in Yavapai County
April is the strongest month here, at 5.05 m/s and about 1,059 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.45 m/s and 352 kWh, so the best month makes 3.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 47% of the year's output in Yavapai County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.87 m/s | 989 kWh | $152 |
| February | 4.67 m/s | 798 kWh | $123 |
| March | 4.69 m/s | 893 kWh | $137 |
| April | 5.05 m/s | 1,059 kWh | $163 |
| May | 4.75 m/s | 926 kWh | $142 |
| June | 4.59 m/s | 814 kWh | $125 |
| July | 3.64 m/s | 416 kWh | $64 |
| August | 3.45 m/s | 352 kWh | $54 |
| September | 3.99 m/s | 537 kWh | $82 |
| October | 4.48 m/s | 782 kWh | $120 |
| November | 4.56 m/s | 796 kWh | $122 |
| December | 4.62 m/s | 855 kWh | $131 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Yavapai County averages 3.4 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.03 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.243, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 6,708 to 12,737 kWh a year, 90% 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 | 4.03 m/s | 6,708 kWh | 97 years |
| 30 m | 4.44 m/s | 8,999 kWh | 72 years |
| 40 m | 4.76 m/s | 10,983 kWh | 59 years |
| 50 m | 5.03 m/s | 12,737 kWh | 51 years |
Counties around Yavapai County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Mohave County, averages 4.69 m/s.
- Maricopa County, AZ: 4.09 m/s, 7,038 kWh, payback 93 years (89 mi)
- Coconino County, AZ: 4.27 m/s, 8,008 kWh, payback 81 years (94 mi)
- Mohave County, AZ: 4.69 m/s, 10,508 kWh, payback 62 years (100 mi)
- La Paz County, AZ: 4.54 m/s, 9,580 kWh, payback 68 years (104 mi)
- Gila County, AZ: 4.05 m/s, 6,831 kWh, payback 95 years (116 mi)
- Pinal County, AZ: 4.22 m/s, 7,732 kWh, payback 84 years (137 mi)
Sun versus wind in Yavapai County
Yavapai County gets 5.7 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,664 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 898. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.9 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.