Wind Turbine Payback in Glascock County, GA
Wind turbine payback in Glascock 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 Glascock County, GA averages 4.34 m/s (9.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 8,403 kWh a year, worth $1,301 at GA's 15.48¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 77 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Glascock County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Glascock County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.34 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,349 kWh a year here against the turbine's 840, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 60¢/kWh, 3.8 times what GA pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.34. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of GA
Glascock County is the 1,867th 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 Glascock County
March is the strongest month here, at 5.03 m/s and about 1,084 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.38 m/s and 329 kWh, so the best month makes 3.3 times the worst. November to March brings in 53% of the year's output in Glascock County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.85 m/s | 978 kWh | $151 |
| February | 4.86 m/s | 892 kWh | $138 |
| March | 5.03 m/s | 1,084 kWh | $168 |
| April | 4.93 m/s | 993 kWh | $154 |
| May | 4.32 m/s | 702 kWh | $109 |
| June | 3.72 m/s | 433 kWh | $67 |
| July | 3.49 m/s | 365 kWh | $57 |
| August | 3.38 m/s | 329 kWh | $51 |
| September | 4.08 m/s | 576 kWh | $89 |
| October | 4.32 m/s | 706 kWh | $109 |
| November | 4.56 m/s | 799 kWh | $124 |
| December | 4.61 m/s | 848 kWh | $131 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Glascock County averages 3.11 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.07 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.304, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 5,788 to 13,010 kWh a year, 125% 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 | 3.84 m/s | 5,788 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.34 m/s | 8,407 kWh | 77 years |
| 40 m | 4.74 m/s | 10,810 kWh | 60 years |
| 50 m | 5.07 m/s | 13,010 kWh | 50 years |
Counties around Glascock County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Glascock County.
- Warren County, GA: 3.71 m/s, 5,209 kWh, payback over 100 years (13 mi)
- Jefferson County, GA: 4.34 m/s, 8,403 kWh, payback 77 years (16 mi)
- McDuffie County, GA: 3.71 m/s, 5,209 kWh, payback over 100 years (19 mi)
- Washington County, GA: 4.34 m/s, 8,403 kWh, payback 77 years (21 mi)
- Hancock County, GA: 3.04 m/s, 2,721 kWh, payback over 100 years (23 mi)
- Taliaferro County, GA: 3.04 m/s, 2,721 kWh, payback over 100 years (28 mi)
Sun versus wind in Glascock County
Glascock County gets 4.62 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,349 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 840. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.6 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.