Wind Turbine Payback in Long County, GA
Wind turbine payback in Long 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 Long County, GA averages 3.47 m/s (7.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 4,211 kWh a year, worth $652 at GA's 15.48¢/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 Long County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Long County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 3.47 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,381 kWh a year here against the turbine's 421, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 119¢/kWh, 7.7 times what GA pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 3.47. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of GA
Long County is the 2,548th 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 Long County
March is the strongest month here, at 3.90 m/s and about 517 kWh. August is the weakest, 2.82 m/s and 179 kWh, so the best month makes 2.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 51% of the year's output in Long County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.77 m/s | 465 kWh | $72 |
| February | 3.79 m/s | 426 kWh | $66 |
| March | 3.90 m/s | 517 kWh | $80 |
| April | 3.83 m/s | 475 kWh | $74 |
| May | 3.50 m/s | 369 kWh | $57 |
| June | 3.04 m/s | 224 kWh | $35 |
| July | 2.88 m/s | 192 kWh | $30 |
| August | 2.82 m/s | 179 kWh | $28 |
| September | 3.32 m/s | 301 kWh | $47 |
| October | 3.50 m/s | 369 kWh | $57 |
| November | 3.64 m/s | 403 kWh | $62 |
| December | 3.64 m/s | 417 kWh | $65 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Long County averages 2.2 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.29 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.415, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 2,407 to 8,120 kWh a year, 237% 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 | 2.93 m/s | 2,407 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.47 m/s | 4,212 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.91 m/s | 6,136 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 4.29 m/s | 8,120 kWh | 80 years |
Counties around Long County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, McIntosh County, averages 4.38 m/s.
- Wayne County, GA: 3.47 m/s, 4,211 kWh, payback over 100 years (17 mi)
- Liberty County, GA: 3.85 m/s, 5,847 kWh, payback over 100 years (17 mi)
- Bryan County, GA: 3.85 m/s, 5,847 kWh, payback over 100 years (26 mi)
- Tattnall County, GA: 3.96 m/s, 6,378 kWh, payback over 100 years (28 mi)
- McIntosh County, GA: 4.38 m/s, 8,632 kWh, payback 75 years (28 mi)
- Evans County, GA: 3.96 m/s, 6,378 kWh, payback over 100 years (29 mi)
Sun versus wind in Long County
Long County gets 4.73 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,381 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 421. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 3.3 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.