Wind Turbine Payback in Scott County, MS
Wind turbine payback in Scott 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 Scott County, MS averages 3.03 m/s (6.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 2,691 kWh a year, worth $405 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 Scott County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Scott County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.9 m/s at the hub against 3.03 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,337 kWh a year here against the turbine's 269, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 186¢/kWh, 12.3 times what MS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.9 m/s instead of 3.03. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MS
Scott County is the 3,045th 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 Scott County
March is the strongest month here, at 3.41 m/s and about 339 kWh. July is the weakest, 2.41 m/s and 99 kWh, so the best month makes 3.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 54% of the year's output in Scott County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.29 m/s | 300 kWh | $45 |
| February | 3.37 m/s | 295 kWh | $44 |
| March | 3.41 m/s | 339 kWh | $51 |
| April | 3.43 m/s | 333 kWh | $50 |
| May | 2.97 m/s | 213 kWh | $32 |
| June | 2.60 m/s | 129 kWh | $19 |
| July | 2.41 m/s | 99 kWh | $15 |
| August | 2.49 m/s | 113 kWh | $17 |
| September | 2.81 m/s | 171 kWh | $26 |
| October | 3.09 m/s | 245 kWh | $37 |
| November | 3.26 m/s | 284 kWh | $43 |
| December | 3.25 m/s | 289 kWh | $44 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Scott County averages 1.78 m/s; at 50 m it is 3.88 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.484, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 1,331 to 5,989 kWh a year, 350% 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 | 2.49 m/s | 1,331 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 3.03 m/s | 2,691 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.48 m/s | 4,261 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 3.88 m/s | 5,989 kWh | over 100 years |
Counties around Scott County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Rankin County, averages 3.64 m/s.
- Leake County, MS: 3.05 m/s, 2,751 kWh, payback over 100 years (24 mi)
- Newton County, MS: 3.03 m/s, 2,691 kWh, payback over 100 years (24 mi)
- Rankin County, MS: 3.64 m/s, 4,905 kWh, payback over 100 years (26 mi)
- Smith County, MS: 2.96 m/s, 2,484 kWh, payback over 100 years (27 mi)
- Madison County, MS: 3.64 m/s, 4,905 kWh, payback over 100 years (33 mi)
- Neshoba County, MS: 3.05 m/s, 2,751 kWh, payback over 100 years (34 mi)
Sun versus wind in Scott County
Scott County gets 4.58 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,337 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 269. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 5.0 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.