Wind Turbine Payback in Hinds County, MS
Wind turbine payback in Hinds 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 Hinds County, MS averages 4.39 m/s (9.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 8,690 kWh a year, worth $1,309 at MS's 15.06¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 76 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Hinds County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Hinds County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.9 m/s at the hub against 4.39 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,355 kWh a year here against the turbine's 869, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 58¢/kWh, 3.8 times what MS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.9 m/s instead of 4.39. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MS
Hinds County is the 1,825th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MS is DeSoto County at 5.13 m/s, payback 50 years.
Month by month in Hinds County
March is the strongest month here, at 5.13 m/s and about 1,138 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.28 m/s and 298 kWh, so the best month makes 3.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 56% of the year's output in Hinds County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.02 m/s | 1,078 kWh | $162 |
| February | 5.14 m/s | 1,037 kWh | $156 |
| March | 5.13 m/s | 1,138 kWh | $171 |
| April | 5.07 m/s | 1,068 kWh | $161 |
| May | 4.25 m/s | 669 kWh | $101 |
| June | 3.63 m/s | 398 kWh | $60 |
| July | 3.28 m/s | 298 kWh | $45 |
| August | 3.36 m/s | 322 kWh | $48 |
| September | 3.89 m/s | 497 kWh | $75 |
| October | 4.38 m/s | 731 kWh | $110 |
| November | 4.76 m/s | 903 kWh | $136 |
| December | 4.91 m/s | 1,014 kWh | $153 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Hinds County averages 3.2 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.09 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.288, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 6,131 to 13,146 kWh a year, 114% 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 | 3.91 m/s | 6,131 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.39 m/s | 8,711 kWh | 76 years |
| 40 m | 4.77 m/s | 11,038 kWh | 60 years |
| 50 m | 5.09 m/s | 13,146 kWh | 51 years |
Counties around Hinds County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Yazoo County, averages 4.92 m/s.
- Warren County, MS: 4.39 m/s, 8,690 kWh, payback 76 years (23 mi)
- Copiah County, MS: 3.21 m/s, 3,265 kWh, payback over 100 years (28 mi)
- Rankin County, MS: 3.64 m/s, 4,905 kWh, payback over 100 years (30 mi)
- Claiborne County, MS: 3.21 m/s, 3,265 kWh, payback over 100 years (33 mi)
- Yazoo County, MS: 4.92 m/s, 11,999 kWh, payback 55 years (35 mi)
- Madison County, MS: 3.64 m/s, 4,905 kWh, payback over 100 years (36 mi)
Sun versus wind in Hinds County
Hinds County gets 4.64 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,355 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 869. 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.