Wind Turbine Payback in Madison County, MS
Wind turbine payback in Madison 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 Madison County, MS averages 3.64 m/s (8.1 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 4,905 kWh a year, worth $739 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 Madison County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Madison County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.9 m/s at the hub against 3.64 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,355 kWh a year here against the turbine's 491, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 102¢/kWh, 6.8 times what MS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.9 m/s instead of 3.64. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MS
Madison County is the 2,346th 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 Madison County
March is the strongest month here, at 4.18 m/s and about 637 kWh. July is the weakest, 2.76 m/s and 166 kWh, so the best month makes 3.8 times the worst. November to March brings in 56% of the year's output in Madison County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.07 m/s | 589 kWh | $89 |
| February | 4.16 m/s | 569 kWh | $86 |
| March | 4.18 m/s | 637 kWh | $96 |
| April | 4.18 m/s | 617 kWh | $93 |
| May | 3.52 m/s | 373 kWh | $56 |
| June | 3.02 m/s | 219 kWh | $33 |
| July | 2.76 m/s | 166 kWh | $25 |
| August | 2.86 m/s | 188 kWh | $28 |
| September | 3.27 m/s | 285 kWh | $43 |
| October | 3.68 m/s | 432 kWh | $65 |
| November | 3.96 m/s | 525 kWh | $79 |
| December | 4.01 m/s | 564 kWh | $85 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Madison County averages 2.42 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.4 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.371, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 3,008 to 8,748 kWh a year, 191% 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 | 3.13 m/s | 3,008 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.64 m/s | 4,906 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 4.05 m/s | 6,833 kWh | 97 years |
| 50 m | 4.4 m/s | 8,748 kWh | 76 years |
Counties around Madison County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Yazoo County, averages 4.92 m/s.
- Yazoo County, MS: 4.92 m/s, 11,999 kWh, payback 55 years (22 mi)
- Rankin County, MS: 3.64 m/s, 4,905 kWh, payback over 100 years (26 mi)
- Leake County, MS: 3.05 m/s, 2,751 kWh, payback over 100 years (31 mi)
- Scott County, MS: 3.03 m/s, 2,691 kWh, payback over 100 years (33 mi)
- Holmes County, MS: 3.71 m/s, 5,209 kWh, payback over 100 years (34 mi)
- Hinds County, MS: 4.39 m/s, 8,690 kWh, payback 76 years (36 mi)
Sun versus wind in Madison County
Madison 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 491. 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.