Wind Turbine Payback in Clinch County, GA
Wind turbine payback in Clinch 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 Clinch County, GA averages 3.4 m/s (7.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 3,942 kWh a year, worth $610 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 Clinch County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Clinch County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 3.4 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,384 kWh a year here against the turbine's 394, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 127¢/kWh, 8.2 times what GA pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 3.4. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of GA
Clinch County is the 2,625th 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 Clinch County
March is the strongest month here, at 3.81 m/s and about 479 kWh. July is the weakest, 2.76 m/s and 165 kWh, so the best month makes 2.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 52% of the year's output in Clinch County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.70 m/s | 439 kWh | $68 |
| February | 3.72 m/s | 404 kWh | $63 |
| March | 3.81 m/s | 479 kWh | $74 |
| April | 3.71 m/s | 427 kWh | $66 |
| May | 3.40 m/s | 334 kWh | $52 |
| June | 2.93 m/s | 197 kWh | $30 |
| July | 2.76 m/s | 165 kWh | $26 |
| August | 2.78 m/s | 170 kWh | $26 |
| September | 3.26 m/s | 282 kWh | $44 |
| October | 3.47 m/s | 358 kWh | $55 |
| November | 3.60 m/s | 390 kWh | $60 |
| December | 3.59 m/s | 400 kWh | $62 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Clinch County averages 2.21 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.15 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.392, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 2,308 to 7,354 kWh a year, 219% 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 | 2.9 m/s | 2,308 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.4 m/s | 3,931 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.8 m/s | 5,625 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 4.15 m/s | 7,354 kWh | 88 years |
Counties around Clinch County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Atkinson County, averages 4.47 m/s.
- Echols County, GA: 3.62 m/s, 4,820 kWh, payback over 100 years (18 mi)
- Ware County, GA: 3.4 m/s, 3,942 kWh, payback over 100 years (19 mi)
- Lanier County, GA: 3.98 m/s, 6,477 kWh, payback 100 years (23 mi)
- Atkinson County, GA: 4.47 m/s, 9,160 kWh, payback 71 years (28 mi)
- Hamilton County, FL: 3.62 m/s, 4,820 kWh, payback over 100 years (33 mi)
- Lowndes County, GA: 3.98 m/s, 6,477 kWh, payback 100 years (34 mi)
Sun versus wind in Clinch County
Clinch County gets 4.74 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,384 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 394. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 3.5 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.