Wind Turbine Payback in Dale County, AL
Wind turbine payback in Dale 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 Dale County, AL averages 3.29 m/s (7.4 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 3,541 kWh a year, worth $585 at AL's 16.51¢/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 Dale County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Dale County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.5 m/s at the hub against 3.29 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,387 kWh a year here against the turbine's 354, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 141¢/kWh, 8.6 times what AL pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.5 m/s instead of 3.29. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of AL
Dale County is the 2,761st windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in AL is Mobile County at 4.72 m/s, payback 57 years.
Month by month in Dale County
March is the strongest month here, at 3.73 m/s and about 450 kWh. July is the weakest, 2.62 m/s and 137 kWh, so the best month makes 3.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 54% of the year's output in Dale County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.65 m/s | 420 kWh | $69 |
| February | 3.67 m/s | 387 kWh | $64 |
| March | 3.73 m/s | 450 kWh | $74 |
| April | 3.62 m/s | 396 kWh | $65 |
| May | 3.17 m/s | 266 kWh | $44 |
| June | 2.73 m/s | 154 kWh | $25 |
| July | 2.62 m/s | 137 kWh | $23 |
| August | 2.66 m/s | 145 kWh | $24 |
| September | 3.15 m/s | 253 kWh | $42 |
| October | 3.39 m/s | 333 kWh | $55 |
| November | 3.55 m/s | 371 kWh | $61 |
| December | 3.54 m/s | 381 kWh | $63 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Dale County averages 2.03 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.12 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.440, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 1,927 to 7,195 kWh a year, 273% 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 | 2.75 m/s | 1,927 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.29 m/s | 3,544 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.73 m/s | 5,318 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 4.12 m/s | 7,195 kWh | 84 years |
Counties around Dale County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Houston County, averages 4.4 m/s.
- Coffee County, AL: 3.1 m/s, 2,906 kWh, payback over 100 years (22 mi)
- Henry County, AL: 4.18 m/s, 7,515 kWh, payback 81 years (23 mi)
- Houston County, AL: 4.4 m/s, 8,748 kWh, payback 69 years (26 mi)
- Geneva County, AL: 4.39 m/s, 8,690 kWh, payback 70 years (27 mi)
- Pike County, AL: 3.04 m/s, 2,721 kWh, payback over 100 years (32 mi)
- Barbour County, AL: 3.04 m/s, 2,721 kWh, payback over 100 years (33 mi)
Sun versus wind in Dale County
Dale County gets 4.75 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,387 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 354. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 3.9 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.