Wind Turbine Payback in Stone County, MS
Wind turbine payback in Stone 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 Stone County, MS averages 2.93 m/s (6.6 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 2,398 kWh a year, worth $361 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 Stone County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Stone County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.9 m/s at the hub against 2.93 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,384 kWh a year here against the turbine's 240, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 209¢/kWh, 13.8 times what MS pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.9 m/s instead of 2.93. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of MS
Stone County is the 3,098th 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 Stone County
March is the strongest month here, at 3.33 m/s and about 313 kWh. July is the weakest, 2.28 m/s and 79 kWh, so the best month makes 4.0 times the worst. November to March brings in 55% of the year's output in Stone County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 3.21 m/s | 279 kWh | $42 |
| February | 3.30 m/s | 274 kWh | $41 |
| March | 3.33 m/s | 313 kWh | $47 |
| April | 3.30 m/s | 294 kWh | $44 |
| May | 2.90 m/s | 196 kWh | $30 |
| June | 2.48 m/s | 107 kWh | $16 |
| July | 2.28 m/s | 79 kWh | $12 |
| August | 2.35 m/s | 91 kWh | $14 |
| September | 2.70 m/s | 147 kWh | $22 |
| October | 2.97 m/s | 215 kWh | $32 |
| November | 3.17 m/s | 257 kWh | $39 |
| December | 3.18 m/s | 270 kWh | $41 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Stone County averages 1.69 m/s; at 50 m it is 3.78 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.500, typical of rough, sheltered ground: trees or buildings slow the low wind a lot. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 1,136 to 5,523 kWh a year, 386% 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 | 2.39 m/s | 1,136 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 2.93 m/s | 2,393 kWh | over 100 years |
| 40 m | 3.38 m/s | 3,871 kWh | over 100 years |
| 50 m | 3.78 m/s | 5,523 kWh | over 100 years |
Counties around Stone County
4 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Perry County, averages 3.41 m/s.
- Harrison County, MS: 3.35 m/s, 3,757 kWh, payback over 100 years (26 mi)
- Perry County, MS: 3.41 m/s, 3,980 kWh, payback over 100 years (27 mi)
- Pearl River County, MS: 2.93 m/s, 2,398 kWh, payback over 100 years (28 mi)
- George County, MS: 3.41 m/s, 3,980 kWh, payback over 100 years (28 mi)
- Forrest County, MS: 2.93 m/s, 2,398 kWh, payback over 100 years (29 mi)
- Hancock County, MS: 3.35 m/s, 3,757 kWh, payback over 100 years (35 mi)
Sun versus wind in Stone County
Stone County gets 4.74 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,384 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 240. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 5.8 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.