Wind Turbine Payback in Meigs County, TN
Wind turbine payback in Meigs 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 Meigs County, TN averages 3.07 m/s (6.9 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 2,813 kWh a year, worth $388 at TN's 13.8¢/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 Meigs County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Meigs County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.4 m/s at the hub against 3.07 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,261 kWh a year here against the turbine's 281, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 178¢/kWh, 12.9 times what TN pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.4 m/s instead of 3.07. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of TN
Meigs County is the 3,012th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in TN is Lake County at 5.54 m/s, payback 44 years.
Month by month in Meigs County
March is the strongest month here, at 3.65 m/s and about 421 kWh. August is the weakest, 2.34 m/s and 89 kWh, so the best month makes 4.7 times the worst. November to March brings in 58% of the year's output in Meigs County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.50 m/s | 367 kWh | $51 |
| February | 3.64 m/s | 377 kWh | $52 |
| March | 3.65 m/s | 421 kWh | $58 |
| April | 3.61 m/s | 393 kWh | $54 |
| May | 2.98 m/s | 217 kWh | $30 |
| June | 2.55 m/s | 120 kWh | $17 |
| July | 2.34 m/s | 89 kWh | $12 |
| August | 2.34 m/s | 89 kWh | $12 |
| September | 2.60 m/s | 129 kWh | $18 |
| October | 3.02 m/s | 225 kWh | $31 |
| November | 3.26 m/s | 282 kWh | $39 |
| December | 3.35 m/s | 318 kWh | $44 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Meigs County averages 1.91 m/s; at 50 m it is 3.82 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.431, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 1,507 to 5,707 kWh a year, 279% 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 | 2.57 m/s | 1,507 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.07 m/s | 2,798 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.47 m/s | 4,209 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 3.82 m/s | 5,707 kWh | over 100 years |
Counties around Meigs County
2 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Polk County, averages 3.24 m/s.
- Rhea County, TN: 3.07 m/s, 2,813 kWh, payback over 100 years (10 mi)
- McMinn County, TN: 3.07 m/s, 2,813 kWh, payback over 100 years (13 mi)
- Bledsoe County, TN: 3.07 m/s, 2,813 kWh, payback over 100 years (23 mi)
- Bradley County, TN: 3.17 m/s, 3,132 kWh, payback over 100 years (25 mi)
- Roane County, TN: 3.05 m/s, 2,751 kWh, payback over 100 years (28 mi)
- Polk County, TN: 3.24 m/s, 3,367 kWh, payback over 100 years (32 mi)
Sun versus wind in Meigs County
Meigs County gets 4.32 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,261 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 281. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 4.5 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.