Wind Turbine Payback in Washington County, FL
Wind turbine payback in Washington 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 Washington County, FL averages 4.33 m/s (9.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 8,346 kWh a year, worth $1,279 at FL's 15.32¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 78 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Washington County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Washington County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.8 m/s at the hub against 4.33 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,402 kWh a year here against the turbine's 835, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 60¢/kWh, 3.9 times what FL pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.8 m/s instead of 4.33. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of FL
Washington County is the 1,877th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in FL is Brevard County at 5.62 m/s, payback 39 years.
Month by month in Washington County
January is the strongest month here, at 4.92 m/s and about 1,019 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.44 m/s and 349 kWh, so the best month makes 2.9 times the worst. November to March brings in 55% of the year's output in Washington County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 4.92 m/s | 1,019 kWh | $156 |
| February | 4.88 m/s | 898 kWh | $138 |
| March | 4.88 m/s | 994 kWh | $152 |
| April | 4.64 m/s | 839 kWh | $129 |
| May | 4.07 m/s | 589 kWh | $90 |
| June | 3.58 m/s | 384 kWh | $59 |
| July | 3.47 m/s | 358 kWh | $55 |
| August | 3.44 m/s | 349 kWh | $53 |
| September | 4.10 m/s | 584 kWh | $89 |
| October | 4.46 m/s | 773 kWh | $118 |
| November | 4.75 m/s | 897 kWh | $137 |
| December | 4.83 m/s | 970 kWh | $149 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Washington County averages 3.19 m/s; at 50 m it is 4.99 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.278, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 5,932 to 12,467 kWh a year, 110% 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 | 3.87 m/s | 5,932 kWh | over 100 years |
| 30 m | 4.33 m/s | 8,342 kWh | 78 years |
| 40 m | 4.69 m/s | 10,507 kWh | 62 years |
| 50 m | 4.99 m/s | 12,467 kWh | 52 years |
Counties around Washington County
5 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Bay County, averages 5.21 m/s.
- Holmes County, FL: 4.39 m/s, 8,690 kWh, payback 75 years (20 mi)
- Jackson County, FL: 4.4 m/s, 8,748 kWh, payback 75 years (30 mi)
- Walton County, FL: 4.38 m/s, 8,632 kWh, payback 76 years (30 mi)
- Calhoun County, FL: 3.33 m/s, 3,684 kWh, payback over 100 years (31 mi)
- Bay County, FL: 5.21 m/s, 13,976 kWh, payback 47 years (31 mi)
- Geneva County, AL: 4.39 m/s, 8,690 kWh, payback 70 years (35 mi)
Sun versus wind in Washington County
Washington County gets 4.8 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,402 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 835. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.7 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.