Wind Turbine Payback in Jefferson County, MS
Wind turbine payback in Jefferson 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 Jefferson County, MS averages 3.61 m/s (8.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 4,778 kWh a year, worth $720 at MS's 15.06¢/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 Jefferson County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Jefferson County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.9 m/s at the hub against 3.61 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,361 kWh a year here against the turbine's 478, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 105¢/kWh, 6.9 times what MS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.9 m/s instead of 3.61. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MS
Jefferson County is the 2,382nd 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 Jefferson County
March is the strongest month here, at 4.13 m/s and about 616 kWh. July is the weakest, 2.77 m/s and 167 kWh, so the best month makes 3.7 times the worst. November to March brings in 55% of the year's output in Jefferson County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.01 m/s | 565 kWh | $85 |
| February | 4.15 m/s | 566 kWh | $85 |
| March | 4.13 m/s | 616 kWh | $93 |
| April | 4.11 m/s | 589 kWh | $89 |
| May | 3.57 m/s | 392 kWh | $59 |
| June | 3.09 m/s | 236 kWh | $36 |
| July | 2.77 m/s | 167 kWh | $25 |
| August | 2.84 m/s | 183 kWh | $28 |
| September | 3.23 m/s | 273 kWh | $41 |
| October | 3.58 m/s | 395 kWh | $59 |
| November | 3.86 m/s | 484 kWh | $73 |
| December | 3.95 m/s | 537 kWh | $81 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Jefferson County averages 2.36 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.39 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.386, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 2,851 to 8,690 kWh a year, 205% 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 | 3.08 m/s | 2,851 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.6 m/s | 4,754 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 4.03 m/s | 6,717 kWh | 99 years |
| 50 m | 4.39 m/s | 8,690 kWh | 76 years |
Counties around Jefferson County
1 of the 6 closest counties is windier at turbine height; the windiest, Tensas Parish, averages 4.1 m/s.
- Claiborne County, MS: 3.21 m/s, 3,265 kWh, payback over 100 years (18 mi)
- Franklin County, MS: 3.02 m/s, 2,661 kWh, payback over 100 years (20 mi)
- Adams County, MS: 3.61 m/s, 4,778 kWh, payback over 100 years (25 mi)
- Tensas Parish, LA: 4.1 m/s, 7,090 kWh, payback over 100 years (25 mi)
- Copiah County, MS: 3.21 m/s, 3,265 kWh, payback over 100 years (36 mi)
- Lincoln County, MS: 3.02 m/s, 2,661 kWh, payback over 100 years (37 mi)
Sun versus wind in Jefferson County
Jefferson County gets 4.66 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,361 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 478. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 2.8 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.