How Could Chernobyl Have Been Prevented: Argumentative Essay

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

About 30 km of land, the government, people’s homes, and the nuclear power plant were all destroyed in a matter of seconds. The majority of people believe Chornobyl was only a mistake since nuclear power is relatively safe, and its effects were not severe, whereas it was much more than that. The explosion was a major factor in the future development of nuclear power plants, the safety precautions regarding the power plants, and even the Soviet Union’s downfall. The Chornobyl disaster was a result of poor leadership because there needed to be more safety precautions that are heavily enforced when dealing with nuclear power, it negatively altered the future development of nuclear power, and contributed to the Soviet Union’s demise.

The Chornobyl disaster resulted in countless deaths as well as the collapse of the governmental structure. People were exposed to radioactive iodine as a result of the Chornobyl disaster, and countless people died as a result of the explosion. Furthermore, the Soviet government’s handling of the event came to represent a corrupt and failing system, shattering individuals’ faith in the Soviet Union’s ability to reform. As the article “Chernobyl” states, “The Chernobyl disaster not only stoked fears over the dangers of nuclear power, it also exposed the Soviet government’s lack of openness to the Soviet people and the international community” (history.com). The statement reveals the effects of the Chornobyl explosion on both domestic and international individuals. Many people began having concerns about the safety of nuclear power, and if it is worth the risk. Furthermore, Chornobyl revealed how untrustworthy the soviet government is when it comes to safety. Gorbachev, the Soviet Union President at the time, went on to confess that the governmental “system as we knew it could no longer continue,” and that the event showed how “important it was to continue the policy of glasnost”. Gorbachev introduced a policy known as glasnost, which means ‘openness’ in Russian. This policy emphasizes that social and political topics in the Soviet Union be openly discussed. After Chornobyl exploded, it had a wide range of consequences, one of which was the impact on people’s perceptions of the Soviet government, one of whom was Gorbachev. The incident highlighted how messed up the Soviet system is and why it could not continue, which is significant given that he was the president at the time. As John Carlson revealed, “The circumstances of Chornobyl reinforced that the Soviet culture of secrecy was at best regressive and at worst disastrous. Gorbachev initiated a series of reforms which unintentionally hastened the collapse of the Soviet system”. The passage shows how the poor leadership of the Soviet Union affected the demise of the governmental system. After Chornobyl, the government did not know how to deal with the issue, and they were not honest with the public. Gorbachev attempted to take matters into his own hands but still failed to improve the situation. None of this would have happened if there had been adequate and well-enforced safety procedures.

There needed to be more safety precautions that are heavily enforced when dealing with nuclear power. Nuclear power is an extremely dangerous matter, and ignoring its safety precautions will result in disasters like Chornobyl. The workers at Chornobyl were unqualified and did not follow the proper safety procedures when doing tests on reactor No. 4, thus causing an explosion referred to as the worst nuclear disaster in history. Samuel Spencer revealed in the “Chernobyl explained: Could Chernobyl have been prevented?” article many ways that Chornobyl could have been avoided, “These include if the staff at Chernobyl had been better trained, if the Soviet government had learned from the lessons of the past and if they had not been so averse to spending money”. The statement refers back to the previous paragraph, which criticized the Soviet government for making poor decisions that resulted in the Chornobyl disaster. Another important component of the statement is the criticism of the unqualified individuals who disregarded safety precautions, resulting in countless deaths. The Director of the Chornobyl power plant at the time, “Brukhanov had also signed off on the launch of the station’s newest and most advanced reactor, Reactor Unit No. 4, even though a key required safety test hadn’t been carried out”. Many people debate whether Brukhanov or his deputy, Anatoly Dyatlov, are to blame for the disaster as they both handled it poorly. Of all of the other reactors, Reactor 4 was intended to be the best. One key flaw was that the safety test was performed only after the reactor had been in use. Brukhanov was not informed of the safety test by Dyatlov, who was supervising the examination. They both failed to perform their role in ensuring the situation’s safety, which resulted in the disaster. “By the time it finally began, in the small hours of April 26, he was sleep-deprived and as ill-tempered as ever. When the young reactor engineer, Leonid Toptunov, made a mistake soon after taking over at the controls on the midnight shift, Dyatlov insisted on continuing with the test—even though Toptunov, and safety protocols, suggested otherwise”. The significance of a safety test cannot be overstated, since even the slightest implications can lead to huge tragedies. Dyatlov was unable to think clearly because the exam was set quite early in the morning. Given the magnitude of the situation, the appropriate course of action after Toptunov’s major mistake would be to play it safe. Despite this, Dyatlov, who was sleepy and ill, took the controversial decision to continue the examination, and the rest is history, meaning the power plant exploded. The safety concerns raised by Chornobyl and its aftermath spread over the world, and many began to be concerned about the development of nuclear power.

Chornobyl altered the development of nuclear power plants, which is unfortunate considering fossil fuels are an inefficient source of energy. Chornobyl is considered the world’s worst nuclear disaster for a reason: it killed 30 plant personnel and firefighters, and if further deaths from radiation were emitted into the atmosphere, the death toll rises to countless numbers. As a result, many began to question whether nuclear power plants’ energy is worth the risk. As stated by Dr. Hans Blix, “There is no doubt that the accident slowed down growth in nuclear power, even though an international recession — with a less than predicted need for electricity — was the most important factor in that slowdown”. This statement demonstrates how the Chornobyl disaster impacted nuclear power development and its industry. People no longer needed nuclear power since they had enough energy from other sources including fossil fuels, and people had serious concerns regarding nuclear power’s safety, despite the fact that it is a superior source of energy than fossil fuels. In fact, nuclear power is so much more efficient, and, “Based on safety and carbon emissions, fossil fuels are the dirtiest and most dangerous, while nuclear and modern renewable energy sources are vastly safer and cleaner”. Fossil fuels are an essential component of our life since they are the world’s primary source of energy. Fossil fuels are extremely harmful to the environment and will have many further consequences in the future, but shifting to nuclear energy will have far fewer negative consequences. Furthermore, if properly managed, nuclear power is both safer and more efficient than fossil fuel-based energy generation. As a member of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, James K. Asselstine stated, “The Chernobyl accident demonstrates vividly that nuclear safety is truly a global issue,” When someone as influential as Asselstine talks about the dangers of nuclear power, people get concerned. As a result, nuclear power is viewed as a negative, and people do not want to live with something which has the potential to destroy everything. This is what happened when the Chornobyl nuclear power plant exploded. People began to be concerned about the future production of nuclear power plants as a result of Chornobyl’s effects on nuclear power development, which is problematic since more fossil fuels will be required to meet human demands.

The Chornobyl disaster resulted in countless deaths as well as influencing the collapse of the Soviet Union; in addition, safety procedures should be strictly enforced when dealing with nuclear power. Finally, Chornobyl negatively influenced the development of nuclear power plants, which is unfortunate considering fossil fuels are an inefficient source of energy. For these reasons, the Chornobyl disaster was a result of poor leadership. About 30 km of land, the government, people’s homes, and the nuclear power plant were all destroyed in a matter of seconds. This is a major event that continues to have an impact on all civilizations today. If Chornobyl had not happened, nuclear power plants would be more common, and fossil fuel-based energy would be less frequent, which is crucial given how harmful fossil fuels are to the environment.

Works Cited

Bloodworth, James, et al. “Did Chernobyl Kill Communism?” UnHerd, 20 Feb. 2020, unherd.com201906chernobyl-and-the-meltdown-of-the-ussr.
Carlson, John. “Chernobyl: the Continuing Political Consequences of a Nuclear Accident.” The Interpreter, The Interpreter, 8 July 2019, www.lowyinstitute.orgthe-interpreterchernobyl-continuing-political-consequences-nuclear-accident.
Diamond, Stuart. “CHERNOBYL CAUSING BIG REVISIONS IN GLOBAL NUCLEAR POWER POLICIES.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 27 Oct. 1986, www.nytimes.com19861027worldchernobyl-causing-big-revisions-in-global-nuclear-power-policies.html.
Gorbachev, Mikhail. “Turning Point at Chernobyl.” The Japan Times, 21 Apr. 2006, www.japantimes.co.jpopinion20060421commentaryworld-commentaryturning-point-at-chernobyl#.XPoajKR7mUk.

Haley Britzky

Published Feb 12, et al. “What Really Happened the Night of the Chernobyl Disaster, According to a New Army Podcast.” Task

Click Here To Order Now!

How Could Chernobyl Have Been Prevented: Argumentative Essay

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)