Wind Turbine Payback in Nevada County, AR
Wind turbine payback in Nevada 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 Nevada County, AR averages 3.11 m/s (7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 2,938 kWh a year, worth $404 at AR's 13.74¢/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 Nevada County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Nevada County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.4 m/s at the hub against 3.11 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,314 kWh a year here against the turbine's 294, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 170¢/kWh, 12.4 times what AR pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.4 m/s instead of 3.11. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of AR
Nevada County is the 2,985th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in AR is Mississippi County at 5.35 m/s, payback 49 years.
Month by month in Nevada County
April is the strongest month here, at 3.58 m/s and about 381 kWh. August is the weakest, 2.55 m/s and 123 kWh, so the best month makes 3.1 times the worst. November to March brings in 51% of the year's output in Nevada County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.27 m/s | 293 kWh | $40 |
| February | 3.38 m/s | 297 kWh | $41 |
| March | 3.52 m/s | 375 kWh | $52 |
| April | 3.58 m/s | 381 kWh | $52 |
| May | 3.20 m/s | 275 kWh | $38 |
| June | 2.81 m/s | 169 kWh | $23 |
| July | 2.55 m/s | 123 kWh | $17 |
| August | 2.55 m/s | 123 kWh | $17 |
| September | 2.83 m/s | 174 kWh | $24 |
| October | 3.10 m/s | 247 kWh | $34 |
| November | 3.30 m/s | 295 kWh | $41 |
| December | 3.23 m/s | 282 kWh | $39 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Nevada County averages 1.82 m/s; at 50 m it is 3.99 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.488, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 1,459 to 6,527 kWh a year, 347% 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 | 2.55 m/s | 1,459 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.11 m/s | 2,937 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.58 m/s | 4,646 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 3.99 m/s | 6,527 kWh | over 100 years |
Counties around Nevada County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Hempstead County, averages 3.55 m/s.
- Hempstead County, AR: 3.55 m/s, 4,530 kWh, payback over 100 years (21 mi)
- Ouachita County, AR: 3.11 m/s, 2,938 kWh, payback over 100 years (25 mi)
- Clark County, AR: 3.13 m/s, 3,002 kWh, payback over 100 years (28 mi)
- Columbia County, AR: 3.19 m/s, 3,198 kWh, payback over 100 years (31 mi)
- Lafayette County, AR: 3.39 m/s, 3,905 kWh, payback over 100 years (34 mi)
- Pike County, AR: 3.28 m/s, 3,506 kWh, payback over 100 years (40 mi)
Sun versus wind in Nevada County
Nevada County gets 4.5 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,314 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 294. 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.