Wind Turbine Payback in Worcester County, MD
Wind turbine payback in Worcester County
Only just. The money comes back late in the turbine's life.
At 30 m, the height a home turbine tower usually reaches, the wind in Worcester County, MD averages 7.01 m/s (15.7 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 27,114 kWh a year, worth $5,778 at MD's 21.31¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 17 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Worcester County
It is close enough that your own site decides it. If you have open land with no trees or buildings upwind, ask an installer to log the wind at 30 m or higher; anything above 6.5 m/s pays back in time. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,226 kWh a year here against the turbine's 2,711, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power already costs enough here: break-even is 18¢/kWh and MD pays 21.31¢.
- The wind clears the break-even speed of 6.5 m/s at today's price.
Against the rest of MD
Worcester County is the 17th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. It is the windiest county in MD.
Month by month in Worcester County
January is the strongest month here, at 8.18 m/s and about 2,970 kWh. August is the weakest, 5.26 m/s and 1,218 kWh, so the best month makes 2.4 times the worst. November to March brings in 51% of the year's output in Worcester County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 8.18 m/s | 2,970 kWh | $633 |
| February | 8.00 m/s | 2,597 kWh | $553 |
| March | 7.97 m/s | 2,855 kWh | $608 |
| April | 7.90 m/s | 2,729 kWh | $582 |
| May | 6.82 m/s | 2,186 kWh | $466 |
| June | 6.07 m/s | 1,664 kWh | $355 |
| July | 5.49 m/s | 1,359 kWh | $290 |
| August | 5.26 m/s | 1,218 kWh | $260 |
| September | 6.14 m/s | 1,704 kWh | $363 |
| October | 6.96 m/s | 2,272 kWh | $484 |
| November | 7.52 m/s | 2,520 kWh | $537 |
| December | 7.96 m/s | 2,850 kWh | $607 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Worcester County averages 6.04 m/s; at 50 m it is 7.52 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.136, typical of very open, smooth ground where height adds little. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 24,428 to 30,672 kWh a year, 26% 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 | 6.64 m/s | 24,428 kWh | 19 years |
| 30 m | 7.02 m/s | 27,152 kWh | 17 years |
| 40 m | 7.3 m/s | 29,126 kWh | 16 years |
| 50 m | 7.52 m/s | 30,672 kWh | 15 years |
Counties around Worcester County
None of the 6 closest counties is windier than Worcester County.
- Wicomico County, MD: 5.87 m/s, 18,742 kWh, payback 25 years (20 mi)
- Sussex County, DE: 5.87 m/s, 18,742 kWh, payback 30 years (31 mi)
- Somerset County, MD: 6.35 m/s, 22,299 kWh, payback 21 years (31 mi)
- Accomack County, VA: 6.35 m/s, 22,299 kWh, payback 27 years (40 mi)
- Dorchester County, MD: 5.21 m/s, 13,976 kWh, payback 34 years (42 mi)
- Caroline County, MD: 5.7 m/s, 17,492 kWh, payback 27 years (53 mi)
Sun versus wind in Worcester County
Worcester County gets 4.2 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,226 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 2,711. This is one of the rare places where a kilowatt of turbine out-produces a kilowatt of panels, by 2.2 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.