Wind Turbine Payback in Garrett County, MD
Wind turbine payback in Garrett 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 Garrett County, MD averages 3.73 m/s (8.3 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 5,297 kWh a year, worth $1,129 at MD's 21.31¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 89 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Garrett County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Garrett County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 6.5 m/s at the hub against 3.73 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,107 kWh a year here against the turbine's 530, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 94¢/kWh, 4.4 times what MD pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 6.5 m/s instead of 3.73. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MD
Garrett County is the 2,261st windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MD is Worcester County at 7.01 m/s, payback 17 years.
Month by month in Garrett County
January is the strongest month here, at 4.86 m/s and about 983 kWh. August is the weakest, 2.61 m/s and 135 kWh, so the best month makes 7.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 66% of the year's output in Garrett County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.86 m/s | 983 kWh | $209 |
| February | 4.89 m/s | 904 kWh | $193 |
| March | 4.49 m/s | 789 kWh | $168 |
| April | 4.23 m/s | 642 kWh | $137 |
| May | 3.40 m/s | 333 kWh | $71 |
| June | 3.02 m/s | 220 kWh | $47 |
| July | 2.73 m/s | 160 kWh | $34 |
| August | 2.61 m/s | 135 kWh | $29 |
| September | 2.90 m/s | 189 kWh | $40 |
| October | 3.48 m/s | 362 kWh | $77 |
| November | 3.88 m/s | 492 kWh | $105 |
| December | 4.39 m/s | 737 kWh | $157 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Garrett County averages 2.35 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.63 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.421, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 3,060 to 10,132 kWh a year, 231% 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 | 3.15 m/s | 3,060 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.73 m/s | 5,315 kWh | 88 years |
| 40 m | 4.21 m/s | 7,704 kWh | 61 years |
| 50 m | 4.63 m/s | 10,132 kWh | 46 years |
Counties around Garrett County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Fayette County, averages 3.8 m/s.
- Mineral County, WV: 3.49 m/s, 4,289 kWh, payback over 100 years (20 mi)
- Preston County, WV: 3.73 m/s, 5,297 kWh, payback over 100 years (22 mi)
- Allegany County, MD: 3.49 m/s, 4,289 kWh, payback over 100 years (31 mi)
- Grant County, WV: 3.65 m/s, 4,948 kWh, payback over 100 years (31 mi)
- Fayette County, PA: 3.8 m/s, 5,614 kWh, payback 84 years (32 mi)
- Somerset County, PA: 3.67 m/s, 5,034 kWh, payback 94 years (33 mi)
Sun versus wind in Garrett County
Garrett County gets 3.79 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,107 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 530. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.1 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.