My point is not that I totally disagree for renewable energy sources but try to find out all the possible disadvantages and encourage government to think carefully before to make project of renewable sources alive. Some another important question and reforms need to be considered in order to minimize the negative and weak aspects.

Also, it is the fact that disadvantages are exist and it will not be rational if we will just ignore them

Also, the construction of renewable power facilities could lead to another not less serious ecological problems.

For instance, the main problem with Hydro Energy is Earthquake Vulnerability. Large Dam Construction has been linked to increased propensity of Earthquakes. Massive Earthquakes in China and Uttarakhand in India were linked to the building of Massive Dams in these countries.

http://environment.about.com/od/renewableenergy/tp/renew_energy.htm

Another disadvantage is that preproduction expenditure to construct a renewable energy project are extremely high, much more so than the conventional power resources we have grown accustomed to.

The time it will take to recover these initial costs is ten to fifteen years. That is a lot of money for private capital investors to support while they wait for a return on their money.

For more details see here:

http://www.renewablepowernews.com/archives/704

Firstly, it is important to mention that renewable power facilities cannot be built anywhere. Some forms of Energy are just better suited to some places. For example you can’t build a nuclear plant on top of an earthquake prone region, you can’t build a wind farm near the Dead Sea etc. Hydro Energy can only be built in particular places while not enough of those places exist globally.

More details

http://www.greenworldinvestor.com/2011/04/01/disadvantages-of-renewable-energy-drawbacks-of-different-alternative-energy-sources/

One of the main reasons that every country should invest money and try to develop the alternative way of energy is the caring about the environment.

With no doubt, energy from coal, oil and natural gases is not reliable any more for near future. Renewable energy sources as solar power, wind energy, ocean energy and etc. are seems to be the best alternative way of energy.

However, we should be aware of the fact, that there are also could be serious disadvantages of producing these kinds of energy.

My opponent mentioned that “Tests are relevant, perfectly moral and necessary”. Probably these experiments in some cases are really important and necessary in particular situations as there are still many serious diseases which are not yet treat adequately: AIDS, Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, many cancers and inherited diseases such as muscular dystrophy and cystic fibrosis.

However, I totally disagree that “Tests are relevant, perfectly moral…” Recent researches show that there are five features as sentience, higher cognitive capacities, capacity for flourishing, sociability and possession of a life, which may be applicable to specific animals. Many of these characteristics had previously been thought to apply exclusively to humans. It appears that animals in possession of one, or several, of these features are moral subjects. Therefore, it could not be ethical at all.

I do not think that “no one wants to use animals unnecessarily or to cause them unnecessary suffering”. Yes, we have some laws and principles as three Rs. But do they affective enough? Are these laws strict enough to make people realize that it is wrong to abuse the power on animals and use not only for medical research but for commercial purposes such as cosmetics, food additives, household cleaning products?

I strongly believe that animals suffer is not absolutely acceptable for things which do not bring any essential benefits in human life. Cosmetics are not necessary to sustain life as it usually used to satisfy ideas of fashion.

Take into account that alternatives could be used successfully there is still a huge number of cosmetic companies that used animals in their research.

http://makeup.lovetoknow.com/Cosmetic_Animal_Testing

Yes, all animals have something in common. BUT! The biological differences between humans and animals exist and these “minor differences” which you have mentioned can lead to lethal errors when applying animal data humans.

More details and specific examples here http://www.safermedicines.org/faqs/faq03.shtml

I absolutely agree with my opponent that “Animal research has enabled us to find treatments .....to prevent some of the most deadly and debilitating viruses..”

However, an alternative argument might be that because of biological differences between humans and animals, results from animal studies cannot reliably apply to humans. Animal research could be based on a false basis, as animal react differently than humans to different drugs, vaccines, and experiments. The most famous example of the dangers of animal testing is the Thalidomide tragedy of the 1960s. This medicine lead to numerous deviations with babies but it had previously been heavily advertised as absolutely safe product which was tested on thousands of animals.

To find more details about Thalidomide tragedy visit this site

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15536544

Firstly, I want to say that experiment on animals is absolutely unethical because people are just another spices of animals. The only difference is that humans are smart and the greater power of over other species is duty of care and compassion but not a licence to abuse. So, it is important to say that people do not have any rights to abuse the power on other nature being only because human is intelligent creature.