Deeming an argument concern trolling is not a personal attack but an attack of the argument, and I stand by it.

any investment in any type of renewable energy ever is going to be economically efficient

1. What does this have to do with Thomas's social justice point?
   
2. I never claimed that and this doesn't follow from any of our past or recent exchanges. There are different methods of promoting renewables and I had a negative opinion of certificates already when they still could be touted as a success by some ten years ago; you may recall some of my comparisons of feed-in rates in different countries too; you may also recall that I was negative about the on-ground installations boom in Spain; I was never too enthusiastic about biofuels with their even stronger conflict with agriculture; the market crash I predicted for after the initial three years in Japan is not something I'd call economically efficient; and I waited for others to chip in but I think Japan's promotion of microwind is folly, just like njh and eurogreen.
   
3. I asked in a previous exchange upthread, what specific meaning of "economically efficient" are you using? There is more than one possible meaning, and debates between me and you (and past exchanges between me and Thomas) were as much about what should be the measure of success for a renewables incentive as about the evaluation of a specific measure (usually a feed-in law for PV) achieving one goal or the other.