Wind Turbine Payback in Pemiscot County, MO
Wind turbine payback in Pemiscot 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 Pemiscot County, MO averages 5.35 m/s (12 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 14,963 kWh a year, worth $2,137 at MO's 14.28¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 47 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Pemiscot County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Pemiscot County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 8.2 m/s at the hub against 5.35 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,276 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,496, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 33¢/kWh, 2.3 times what MO pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 8.2 m/s instead of 5.35. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MO
Pemiscot County is the 1,303rd windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in MO is Atchison County at 6.17 m/s, payback 33 years.
Month by month in Pemiscot County
April is the strongest month here, at 6.42 m/s and about 1,874 kWh. July is the weakest, 3.93 m/s and 529 kWh, so the best month makes 3.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 54% of the year's output in Pemiscot County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 6.06 m/s | 1,710 kWh | $244 |
| February | 6.17 m/s | 1,609 kWh | $230 |
| March | 6.30 m/s | 1,859 kWh | $265 |
| April | 6.42 m/s | 1,874 kWh | $268 |
| May | 5.38 m/s | 1,289 kWh | $184 |
| June | 4.46 m/s | 747 kWh | $107 |
| July | 3.93 m/s | 529 kWh | $76 |
| August | 3.98 m/s | 551 kWh | $79 |
| September | 4.57 m/s | 803 kWh | $115 |
| October | 5.35 m/s | 1,273 kWh | $182 |
| November | 5.89 m/s | 1,553 kWh | $222 |
| December | 5.86 m/s | 1,588 kWh | $227 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Pemiscot County averages 4.06 m/s; at 50 m it is 6.09 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.252, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 11,435 to 20,371 kWh a year, 78% 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 | 4.83 m/s | 11,435 kWh | 61 years |
| 30 m | 5.35 m/s | 14,994 kWh | 47 years |
| 40 m | 5.76 m/s | 17,910 kWh | 39 years |
| 50 m | 6.09 m/s | 20,371 kWh | 34 years |
Counties around Pemiscot County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Lake County, averages 5.54 m/s.
- Dunklin County, MO: 5.35 m/s, 14,963 kWh, payback 47 years (16 mi)
- Lake County, TN: 5.54 m/s, 16,326 kWh, payback 44 years (19 mi)
- Dyer County, TN: 5.41 m/s, 15,390 kWh, payback 47 years (24 mi)
- New Madrid County, MO: 5.54 m/s, 16,326 kWh, payback 43 years (28 mi)
- Lauderdale County, TN: 5.41 m/s, 15,390 kWh, payback 47 years (32 mi)
- Mississippi County, AR: 5.35 m/s, 14,963 kWh, payback 49 years (34 mi)
Sun versus wind in Pemiscot County
Pemiscot County gets 4.37 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,276 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,496. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 1.2 times. 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.