Wind Turbine Payback in Clayton County, GA
Wind turbine payback in Clayton 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 Clayton County, GA averages 3.86 m/s (8.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 5,894 kWh a year, worth $912 at GA's 15.48¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of over 100 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Clayton County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Clayton County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 3.86 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,317 kWh a year here against the turbine's 589, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 85¢/kWh, 5.5 times what GA pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 3.86. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of GA
Clayton County is the 2,167th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in GA is Glynn County at 5.08 m/s, payback 49 years.
Month by month in Clayton County
March is the strongest month here, at 4.55 m/s and about 821 kWh. August is the weakest, 2.86 m/s and 188 kWh, so the best month makes 4.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 58% of the year's output in Clayton County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.54 m/s | 812 kWh | $126 |
| February | 4.53 m/s | 730 kWh | $113 |
| March | 4.55 m/s | 821 kWh | $127 |
| April | 4.38 m/s | 708 kWh | $110 |
| May | 3.72 m/s | 446 kWh | $69 |
| June | 3.11 m/s | 241 kWh | $37 |
| July | 2.87 m/s | 190 kWh | $29 |
| August | 2.86 m/s | 188 kWh | $29 |
| September | 3.47 m/s | 346 kWh | $54 |
| October | 3.86 m/s | 499 kWh | $77 |
| November | 4.18 m/s | 616 kWh | $95 |
| December | 4.32 m/s | 703 kWh | $109 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Clayton County averages 2.67 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.59 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.337, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 3,833 to 9,885 kWh a year, 158% 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 | 3.37 m/s | 3,833 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.86 m/s | 5,914 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 4.26 m/s | 7,939 kWh | 81 years |
| 50 m | 4.59 m/s | 9,885 kWh | 65 years |
Counties around Clayton County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Clayton County.
- Fayette County, GA: 3.86 m/s, 5,894 kWh, payback over 100 years (11 mi)
- Henry County, GA: 3.86 m/s, 5,894 kWh, payback over 100 years (16 mi)
- Fulton County, GA: 3.79 m/s, 5,568 kWh, payback over 100 years (17 mi)
- DeKalb County, GA: 3.79 m/s, 5,568 kWh, payback over 100 years (19 mi)
- Spalding County, GA: 3.86 m/s, 5,894 kWh, payback over 100 years (21 mi)
- Douglas County, GA: 3.16 m/s, 3,099 kWh, payback over 100 years (23 mi)
Sun versus wind in Clayton County
Clayton County gets 4.51 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,317 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 589. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.2 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.