Ector County

Ector County, Texas — key demographics (latest Census/ACS estimates; rounded)

Population

• Total: ≈170,000 (2023 population estimate)

Age

• Median age: ≈31
• Under 18: ≈30%
• 65 and over: ≈11%

Gender

• Male: ≈51%
• Female: ≈49%

Race/ethnicity

• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ≈60%
• White, non-Hispanic: ≈29–30%
• Black/African American: ≈6%
• Asian: ≈1–2%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ≈1%
• Two or more/other (non-Hispanic): ≈2–3%

Households and housing

• Households: ≈57,000
• Average household size: ≈3.0
• Family households: ≈70–75%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ≈60–65%
• Median household income: ≈$70,000
• Persons below poverty: ≈12–14%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 Population Estimates (Vintage 2023) and American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year tables (e.g., DP05, S0101, S1101, S1901). For precise, publication-ready figures, specify your preferred dataset/vintage and I’ll provide exact values.

Ector County, TX snapshot (estimates)

• Population: ~165–170k (most in Odessa; large rural areas outside the city lower overall density and raise last‑mile connectivity costs).
• Estimated email users: ~135k–150k. Assumes very high adoption among adults (≈90%+) and lower but growing use among teens.
• Age mix of email users (county skews younger than U.S. average):
  • Under 18: 5–7%
  • 18–34: 35–40%
  • 35–54: 33–36%
  • 55–64: 12–14%
  • 65+: 8–10%
• Gender split: roughly balanced; slight male tilt consistent with local energy-sector workforce.
• Digital access and trends:
  • Household fixed-broadband subscription: ~75–85% (higher in Odessa, lower in outlying areas).
  • Smartphone‑only internet households: ~15–25%.
  • Mobile coverage: strong 4G/5G along the I‑20/urban corridor; speeds and reliability drop in sparsely populated zones.
  • Public access: libraries, schools, and municipal sites provide Wi‑Fi; community colleges and ISDs are common access hubs.
  • Ongoing fiber and 5G build‑outs in Odessa are improving reliability and capacity; rural pockets still depend on cable/DSL, fixed wireless, or satellite.

Notes: Figures are derived from recent population estimates plus national/regional email and broadband adoption benchmarks; use local surveys for precise counts.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Ector County, Texas (Odessa area)

What stands out versus Texas overall

• Higher reliance on mobile-only internet: more households use smartphones or wireless hotspots as their primary home connection compared with the Texas average, driven by patchy wired broadband outside Odessa and a large shift-work, transient workforce tied to oil and gas.
• Younger, more Hispanic user base: the county’s younger median age and majority Hispanic population tilt usage toward high messaging/video app use (e.g., WhatsApp) and family-group communications; this differs from many older, suburban Texas counties.
• Work-driven mobility patterns: network load and mobility are shaped by oilfield shift schedules and travel along the I-20/SH-191/lease-road corridors, producing different peak times and localized congestion compared with big-city, 9-to-5 patterns.
• Coverage contrast: strong 4G/5G in Odessa and along major highways, but noticeable coverage and capacity gaps on rural lease roads and in far-west/north county areas—an urban/rural spread that’s sharper than in most Texas metros.

User estimates (order-of-magnitude; based on ACS population, Pew ownership rates, and FCC availability patterns)

• Population base: roughly 170,000 residents.
• Adults (18+): about 120,000.
• Adult mobile phone users (any mobile): approximately 113,000–116,000 (about 94–97% of adults).
• Adult smartphone users: roughly 100,000–108,000 (about 83–90% of adults).
• Teens (12–17) with smartphones: on the order of 14,000–16,000, reflecting very high teen smartphone penetration.
• Mobile-only internet households: likely in the 22–30% range, above the Texas average, reflecting limited fiber/DSL outside Odessa and higher rates of rental, RV, and temporary housing linked to the energy sector.

Demographic patterns that shape usage

• Age: A younger profile than the Texas average boosts overall smartphone adoption and heavy use of video, gaming, and social platforms. Older-adult adoption is improving but still lags younger cohorts; device training and language support matter for uptake among seniors.
• Ethnicity/language: A majority Hispanic population supports higher bilingual app and messaging use; WhatsApp and other OTT calling/messaging see strong adoption for family networks. Spanish-language support, billing clarity, and in-store assistance are more salient than in many Texas suburbs.
• Income/education mix: Lower median educational attainment and income variability (boom-bust cycles) correlate with:
  • Greater use of prepaid plans and budget Android devices than in affluent Texas metros.
  • Price sensitivity to data caps and promotional 5G home internet.
  • Higher device churn in physically demanding jobs (preference for ruggedized phones/cases).
• Workforce patterns: Company-issued lines, push-to-talk/workforce apps, and fleet tracking are common in oilfield operations, pushing daytime traffic onto specific corridors and sites rather than downtown cores.

Digital infrastructure and coverage notes

• 4G/5G footprint: All three national carriers report 5G coverage in Odessa proper, with mid-band 5G more typical; suburban/rural areas rely on LTE with pockets of weaker signal away from main highways and towns.
• Capacity hot spots: I-20, SH-191, industrial yards, and major well-service areas can experience congestion at shift changes and during booms. Temporary cells (COWs) are sometimes deployed for events or short-term capacity relief.
• Backhaul and tower siting: Denser macro and small-cell deployments cluster along the I-20 corridor and around UTPB, medical centers, and shopping districts; tower spacing widens toward the north and west of the county.
• Public safety and resilience: FirstNet (Band 14) presence benefits first responders; extreme heat, dust, and high winds can challenge equipment and power, so battery backup and hardened sites are relevant.
• Home internet via wireless: T-Mobile and Verizon 5G home internet products are available in much of Odessa and are gaining traction as alternatives to cable/DSL, especially among renters and mobile workers. This substitution effect is stronger than in many Texas cities with widespread fiber.
• Wi‑Fi and public access: Fewer municipal/public Wi‑Fi options than large metros; libraries and schools play an outsized role for device charging and Wi‑Fi access during outages or for households without wired service.

Implications for providers and planners

• Plan for asymmetric, corridor-based demand rather than downtown-centric traffic.
• Prepaid-friendly, bilingual support and rugged device options will overperform.
• Expanding mid-band 5G and adding sites or small cells along oilfield approaches can relieve congestion and improve safety coverage.
• Partnerships with schools and community orgs help address mobile-only households and homework connectivity gaps.

Notes on methodology

• Estimates synthesize recent ACS population/age structure, typical U.S./Texas smartphone ownership rates (Pew and similar studies), and FCC-reported coverage/availability patterns. Ranges reflect uncertainty and Ector County’s boom-bust dynamics.

Here’s a concise, data‑driven snapshot of social media in Ector County, TX (Odessa area). Figures are estimates based on Pew Research Center 2023–2024 platform adoption, U.S. Census/ACS county demographics, and Texas usage patterns; exact county-level platform stats aren’t published.

At a glance

• Population: ~170,000 residents
• Active social media users: ~115,000–130,000 (≈70–77% of residents; ≈80–85% of those age 13+)
• Smartphone access (adults): ~88–92%

Age mix of local social media users (share of users)

• 13–17: 13%
• 18–24: 14%
• 25–34: 21%
• 35–44: 18%
• 45–54: 15%
• 55–64: 11%
• 65+: 8%

Gender breakdown

• Overall users: roughly even, slight male skew in the county (≈51% male / 49% female population), but platform use skews:
  • More female: Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat
  • More male: YouTube, X (Twitter), Reddit
  • Near‑even: WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger

Most‑used platforms (share of residents 13+, estimated)

• YouTube: 82–85%
• Facebook: 62–68% (very high use of local Groups/Marketplace)
• Instagram: 48–55%
• TikTok: 38–45% (higher among teens/20s)
• Snapchat: 30–36% (very strong among HS/college)
• WhatsApp: 22–28% (notably higher in Hispanic households and work crews)
• X (Twitter): 18–22% (sports, breaking news)
• Reddit: 15–20% (male 18–34 skew)
• LinkedIn: 12–15% (below national average given local industry mix)
• Nextdoor: 8–12% (neighborhood pockets)

Behavioral trends to know

• Community-first on Facebook: Heavy engagement in buy/sell/trade, yard sale, lost & found pets, local news/crime watch, school/church events, high‑school sports (e.g., Permian football).
• Oil & gas rhythm: Shift work drives peak activity early mornings (5–7 a.m.), lunch (12–1), and late evening (8–10 p.m.); recruiting, certs, and job chatter common on Facebook and YouTube.
• Video leads: Short vertical video (TikTok/Reels) for entertainment and local promos; YouTube for how‑to (automotive, trades, home repair) and gear reviews.
• Messaging hubs: Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp for family, church, and crew coordination; bilingual (English/Spanish) content performs best.
• Local trust signals: Users respond to deals, giveaways, and recognizable local faces/locations; higher skepticism of non‑local pages.
• Sports and weather spikes: Real‑time spikes around Friday night football, severe weather, traffic on I‑20, and power/water alerts.
• Small‑business playbook: Facebook + Instagram for promotions and DMs; TikTok for personality-driven local branding; geotagging and Spanish copy lift results.

Notes and sources

• Pew Research Center (2023–2024) U.S. social media platform use (adults, teens)
• U.S. Census Bureau/ACS (latest) for Ector County population/age
• Edison Research: The Infinite Dial 2024; DataReportal/We Are Social (U.S. benchmarks)