Wind Turbine Payback in Elmore County, AL
Wind turbine payback in Elmore 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 Elmore County, AL averages 3.88 m/s (8.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 5,989 kWh a year, worth $989 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 Elmore County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Elmore County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.5 m/s at the hub against 3.88 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,346 kWh a year here against the turbine's 599, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 83¢/kWh, 5.1 times what AL pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.5 m/s instead of 3.88. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of AL
Elmore County is the 2,149th 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 Elmore County
March is the strongest month here, at 4.47 m/s and about 780 kWh. July is the weakest, 2.94 m/s and 206 kWh, so the best month makes 3.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 56% of the year's output in Elmore County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.37 m/s | 729 kWh | $120 |
| February | 4.48 m/s | 709 kWh | $117 |
| March | 4.47 m/s | 780 kWh | $129 |
| April | 4.35 m/s | 694 kWh | $115 |
| May | 3.71 m/s | 441 kWh | $73 |
| June | 3.13 m/s | 246 kWh | $41 |
| July | 2.94 m/s | 206 kWh | $34 |
| August | 3.03 m/s | 229 kWh | $38 |
| September | 3.66 m/s | 408 kWh | $67 |
| October | 3.99 m/s | 554 kWh | $91 |
| November | 4.24 m/s | 643 kWh | $106 |
| December | 4.27 m/s | 680 kWh | $112 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Elmore County averages 2.76 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.54 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.309, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 4,020 to 9,580 kWh a year, 138% 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 | 3.42 m/s | 4,020 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.88 m/s | 5,975 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 4.24 m/s | 7,828 kWh | 77 years |
| 50 m | 4.54 m/s | 9,580 kWh | 63 years |
Counties around Elmore County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Elmore County.
- Coosa County, AL: 3.22 m/s, 3,299 kWh, payback over 100 years (24 mi)
- Tallapoosa County, AL: 3.11 m/s, 2,938 kWh, payback over 100 years (27 mi)
- Montgomery County, AL: 3.04 m/s, 2,721 kWh, payback over 100 years (27 mi)
- Autauga County, AL: 3.35 m/s, 3,757 kWh, payback over 100 years (30 mi)
- Macon County, AL: 3.26 m/s, 3,436 kWh, payback over 100 years (30 mi)
- Chilton County, AL: 3.13 m/s, 3,002 kWh, payback over 100 years (38 mi)
Sun versus wind in Elmore County
Elmore County gets 4.61 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,346 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 599. 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.