IELTS Writing Task 2: The Benefits and Drawbacks of Nuclear Energy – Sample Essays Band 6-9 with Analysis

Introduction

Nuclear energy remains one of the most frequently examined topics in IELTS Writing Task 2, appearing consistently in exams across Asia, Europe, and Australia. This controversial subject tests candidates’ ability to present balanced arguments while demonstrating sophisticated vocabulary and complex grammatical structures. Understanding how to approach questions about nuclear power effectively can significantly boost your Writing band score.

In this comprehensive guide, you’ll discover three authentic sample essays ranging from Band 5-6 to Band 8-9, complete with detailed scoring analyses. We’ll examine the precise differences between band levels, explore essential vocabulary, and reveal high-scoring sentence structures that examiners reward. Whether you’re aiming to improve from Band 6 to 7 or push towards Band 8-9, this article provides actionable strategies and real examples to help you succeed.

Verified Past IELTS Writing Task 2 Questions:

1. “Nuclear energy is a better choice for meeting increasing demand for energy than other sources. To what extent do you agree or disagree?” (Academic exam, 2022)
2. “Some people think that nuclear power is beneficial for the environment, while others believe it poses serious risks. Discuss both views and give your opinion.” (Academic exam, 2021)
3. “The advantages of nuclear technology far outweigh the disadvantages. To what extent do you agree or disagree?” (Academic exam, 2023)

Question & Analysis

Some people believe that nuclear energy is essential for meeting future energy demands, while others argue that the risks associated with it are too great. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Question Type: Discussion + Opinion (Both Views + Own Opinion)

Key Terms Explained:

• Nuclear energy – Power generated from nuclear fission reactions in atomic reactors
• Essential for meeting future energy demands – Necessary to satisfy increasing global electricity consumption
• Risks associated with it – Dangers including radiation leaks, nuclear accidents, and radioactive waste disposal

Common Pitfalls:

1. Only discussing benefits OR drawbacks instead of both views
2. Failing to clearly state your own opinion
3. Using emotionally charged language instead of balanced academic tone
4. Overlooking the “future energy demands” aspect of the question
5. Providing general environmental arguments without nuclear-specific examples

Strategic Approach:

• Paragraph 1: Introduction with thesis statement indicating both views will be discussed
• Paragraph 2: Reasons why nuclear energy is essential (efficiency, low carbon emissions, reliability)
• Paragraph 3: Reasons why risks are too great (safety concerns, waste management, high costs)
• Paragraph 4: Your opinion with justification
• Paragraph 5: Conclusion summarizing both perspectives and restating your position

This question requires you to demonstrate balance before presenting your viewpoint. The examiner expects equal development of both perspectives with specific, relevant examples. For more context on this energy debate, consider exploring Nuclear power: viable energy solution? which provides additional perspectives on nuclear energy’s role in modern power generation.

Band 8-9 Sample Essay

Characteristics of Band 8-9 Essays:
A Band 8-9 essay demonstrates sophisticated vocabulary with natural collocations, complex sentence structures used accurately, fully developed arguments with relevant examples, and seamless logical flow between ideas. It addresses all parts of the task with precision and presents a clear, well-supported position throughout.

---

The debate surrounding nuclear energy has intensified as nations grapple with escalating energy consumption and environmental concerns. While proponents argue that nuclear power represents an indispensable solution to future energy shortages, critics contend that the potential catastrophic consequences outweigh any benefits. This essay will examine both perspectives before arguing that, despite legitimate concerns, nuclear energy remains crucial for sustainable development.

Advocates of nuclear power emphasize its remarkable capacity to generate substantial electricity with minimal carbon emissions. Unlike fossil fuel plants, nuclear reactors produce virtually no greenhouse gases during operation, making them invaluable in combating climate change. Furthermore, nuclear facilities operate continuously regardless of weather conditions, providing baseload power that intermittent renewable sources cannot match. France exemplifies this efficiency, deriving approximately 70% of its electricity from nuclear plants while maintaining one of Europe’s lowest carbon footprints. Additionally, technological advancements in reactor design have significantly enhanced safety protocols, with modern Generation III+ reactors incorporating passive safety systems that function without human intervention.

Nevertheless, opponents highlight the inherent dangers that nuclear accidents pose to human populations and ecosystems. The Fukushima disaster in 2011 demonstrated how natural disasters can trigger nuclear crises with devastating long-term consequences, displacing over 150,000 residents and contaminating vast agricultural areas. Moreover, the unsolved challenge of radioactive waste disposal remains a formidable obstacle, as spent fuel remains hazardous for thousands of years. The financial burden cannot be overlooked either; constructing nuclear facilities requires enormous capital investment, with projects frequently exceeding budgets and timelines, as evidenced by the Hinkley Point C plant in Britain.

In my view, while these risks warrant serious consideration, the urgency of climate change necessitates embracing nuclear energy as a transitional solution. The immediate threat posed by global warming arguably surpasses the statistical risk of nuclear accidents, particularly given modern safety enhancements. However, this support should be conditional upon stringent regulatory oversight and continued investment in renewable alternatives that may eventually supersede nuclear power.

In conclusion, although nuclear energy presents genuine safety and environmental challenges, its capacity to provide clean, reliable baseload power makes it an essential component of our energy portfolio as we transition toward a fully renewable future. The key lies not in rejecting nuclear technology outright, but in implementing it responsibly while accelerating research into safer, more sustainable alternatives.

Word count: 412 words

Modern nuclear power plant with cooling towers illustrating IELTS Writing Task 2 energy topic

Band Score Analysis

Criteria	Band	Justification
Task Response	9	Fully addresses all parts of the task with comprehensive development. Presents both views with equal depth (para 2 and 3), clearly states opinion (para 4), and maintains consistent position throughout. Uses specific, relevant examples (France, Fukushima, Hinkley Point C) that directly support arguments.
Coherence & Cohesion	9	Ideas progress seamlessly with sophisticated linking devices (“Nevertheless,” “Moreover,” “Furthermore”). Clear paragraphing with each paragraph having distinct central topic. Internal referencing creates cohesion (“these risks,” “this support”). No mechanical or repetitive transitions.
Lexical Resource	9	Wide range of vocabulary used naturally with precise meaning (“escalating energy consumption,” “intermittent renewable sources,” “passive safety systems”). Sophisticated collocations (“warrant serious consideration,” “formidable obstacle”) with no noticeable errors. Topic-specific terminology used accurately throughout.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	9	Uses wide range of complex structures accurately (relative clauses, participle phrases, conditional statements). Varied sentence beginnings and lengths create natural rhythm. Zero grammatical errors. Perfect control of punctuation including sophisticated usage.

Why This Essay Excels:

1. Sophisticated vocabulary with natural usage: Phrases like “grapple with escalating energy consumption” and “formidable obstacle” demonstrate advanced lexical range without appearing forced or unnatural

2. Complex grammatical structures used accurately: The essay employs subordination (“While proponents argue that…critics contend that…”), non-defining relative clauses, and passive constructions flawlessly

3. Specific, relevant examples: References to France’s 70% nuclear electricity, Fukushima’s 150,000 displaced residents, and Hinkley Point C provide concrete evidence rather than vague generalizations

4. Balanced development with clear opinion: Equal attention to both perspectives (two substantial body paragraphs) before presenting a nuanced personal view that acknowledges complexity

5. Seamless coherence throughout: Ideas flow logically with sophisticated transitions that show causation, contrast, and addition without mechanical linking phrases

6. Precise task achievement: Directly addresses “essential for meeting future energy demands” and “risks are too great” while maintaining clear positioning

7. Academic tone with appropriate hedging: Uses language like “arguably,” “warrant serious consideration,” and “should be conditional upon” to demonstrate academic caution

Band 6.5-7 Sample Essay

Characteristics of Band 6.5-7 Essays:
A Band 6.5-7 essay uses a good range of vocabulary with some sophistication, demonstrates control of complex sentences with occasional errors, addresses all parts of the task adequately, and presents clear overall progression with generally effective cohesive devices. The position is relevant and supported, though development may be less thorough than Band 8-9.

---

The question of whether nuclear energy should be developed further is controversial in today’s world. Some people think that nuclear power is necessary to meet growing energy needs, while others believe the dangers are too serious. This essay will discuss both sides and give my opinion.

On the one hand, nuclear energy has several important advantages for solving future energy problems. Firstly, nuclear power plants can produce large amounts of electricity without releasing carbon dioxide, which is better for the environment compared to coal or oil. This is especially important because climate change is becoming a serious global issue. Secondly, nuclear energy is very reliable because it can generate power 24 hours a day, unlike solar or wind energy which depends on weather conditions. For example, countries like South Korea get a significant portion of their electricity from nuclear plants and have stable power supply. Finally, nuclear fuel is very efficient, meaning that a small amount of uranium can produce much more energy than fossil fuels.

On the other hand, there are significant risks associated with nuclear power that cannot be ignored. The most obvious concern is safety, as nuclear accidents can cause terrible disasters. The Chernobyl accident in 1986 and the Fukushima incident in 2011 showed how dangerous nuclear power can be, causing deaths, illnesses, and forcing people to leave their homes. Additionally, nuclear waste is radioactive and dangerous for thousands of years, and we still don’t have a perfect solution for storing it safely. Furthermore, building nuclear power stations requires huge amounts of money and takes many years to complete.

In my opinion, nuclear energy should be used carefully as part of our energy solution. While the risks are real, I think the benefits of clean, reliable power are important for fighting climate change. However, governments must ensure very strict safety regulations and continue investing in renewable energy sources like solar and wind power as better long-term solutions.

In conclusion, nuclear energy has both advantages and disadvantages. Although it offers efficient, low-carbon electricity, the safety concerns and waste problems are serious issues. I believe nuclear power can play a role in meeting future energy demands, but only with proper safety measures and as a temporary solution while we develop better alternatives.

Word count: 398 words

Band Score Analysis

Criteria	Band	Justification
Task Response	7	Addresses all parts of the task appropriately with clear position. Both views discussed with relevant supporting points (advantages in para 2, disadvantages in para 3). Opinion stated and developed in para 4. Examples provided but could be more specific with data.
Coherence & Cohesion	7	Clear overall progression with logical organization. Uses cohesive devices effectively (“Firstly,” “Secondly,” “Additionally”) though somewhat mechanically. Paragraphing is appropriate with clear central topics. Some repetition of “nuclear energy/power” could be varied more.
Lexical Resource	6.5	Good range of vocabulary for the task (“controversial,” “significant portion,” “radioactive”) with some less common items. Attempts collocations (“serious global issue,” “stable power supply”) generally successfully. Some imprecision (“terrible disasters” – somewhat informal; “better long-term solutions” – vague).
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	7	Uses mix of simple and complex sentence forms with good control. Attempts complex structures (relative clauses, causal links) mostly successfully. Minor errors do not impede communication. Range could be wider with more varied subordination and advanced structures.

Direct Comparison with Band 8-9:

Aspect	Band 6.5-7	Band 8-9
Introduction	“The question of whether nuclear energy should be developed further is controversial” (straightforward)	“The debate surrounding nuclear energy has intensified as nations grapple with escalating energy consumption” (sophisticated vocabulary + specific context)
Cohesion	“Firstly,” “Secondly,” “Finally” (mechanical listing)	“Furthermore,” “Nevertheless,” “Moreover” (natural, varied transitions showing logical relationships)
Examples	“countries like South Korea” (general reference)	“France exemplifies this efficiency, deriving approximately 70% of its electricity from nuclear plants” (specific data)
Vocabulary	“serious global issue” (appropriate but common)	“formidable obstacle,” “warrant serious consideration” (sophisticated collocations)
Grammar	“because climate change is becoming a serious global issue” (clear but simple causation)	“The immediate threat posed by global warming arguably surpasses the statistical risk of nuclear accidents” (complex noun phrase + comparative structure)
Opinion	“should be used carefully as part of our energy solution” (clear but somewhat vague)	“the urgency of climate change necessitates embracing nuclear energy as a transitional solution” (precise position with nuanced qualification)

The Band 6.5-7 essay competently addresses the task with clear organization and adequate vocabulary, but lacks the sophistication, precision, and seamless flow of the Band 8-9 response. To understand more about balancing different energy perspectives, you might explore Nuclear energy: pros and cons which provides additional arguments relevant to IELTS Writing Task 2 energy questions.

Band 5-6 Sample Essay

Characteristics of Band 5-6 Essays:
A Band 5-6 essay addresses the task but may have limited development, uses adequate vocabulary with some inappropriate choices, produces mainly simple sentences with some complex attempts containing errors, and shows basic organization though cohesion may be faulty. The position may be unclear or inconsistently maintained.

---

Nowadays, nuclear energy is a big topic that many people discuss. Some people say it is good for energy in the future, but other people think it is too dangerous. In this essay, I will talk about both opinions and give my idea.

First, nuclear energy have many benefits. It can make a lot of electric power and is good for environment because it don’t make pollution like coal. Many countries use nuclear power and they have enough electricity. Also, nuclear energy is cheaper than some other energies in the long time. It is important because the world need more energy every year because population is increasing.

However, nuclear power has problems too. The biggest problem is it is very danger. If there is accident, it can kill many people and destroy the environment. For example, in Japan there was big accident in Fukushima and many people cannot live in their houses anymore. Also, nuclear waste is very danger and stay danger for long time. We don’t know where to put this waste. Another problem is building nuclear plant cost too much money and take long time.

In my opinion, I think nuclear energy can be use but we must be very careful. The government should make good rules to make sure it is safe. But I also think we should use other energy like solar and wind because they are more safe and better for future.

In conclusion, nuclear energy have good points and bad points. It can give us power but also very danger. We should use it carefully and also find other better ways to get energy.

Word count: 282 words

Fukushima nuclear disaster consequences showing IELTS Writing Task 2 nuclear energy risks

Band Score Analysis

Criteria	Band	Justification
Task Response	6	Addresses all parts of the task but with limited development. Both views presented (benefits in para 2, problems in para 3) and opinion given (para 4), but arguments lack depth and specific supporting details. Examples are mentioned but not fully developed.
Coherence & Cohesion	5.5	Basic organization is present with identifiable paragraphs. Uses simple cohesive devices (“First,” “However,” “Also”) repetitively. Some progression of ideas but connections between sentences are sometimes unclear. Paragraphing present but not always logical.
Lexical Resource	5.5	Limited range of vocabulary adequate for basic task completion. Attempts topic vocabulary (“nuclear waste,” “pollution”) but with noticeable errors and imprecision (“danger” instead of “dangerous,” “electric power” awkward). Some inappropriate word choices affect clarity. Repetition of basic words (“danger/dangerous,” “energy”).
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	5	Predominantly simple sentence structures. Attempts some complex sentences but with frequent errors (“nuclear energy have,” “it don’t make pollution,” “population is increasing” – tense inconsistency). Errors sometimes cause difficulty for reader. Basic punctuation generally correct.

Learning from Mistakes

Mistake	Error Type	Correction	Explanation
“nuclear energy have many benefits”	Subject-verb agreement	“nuclear energy has many benefits”	Uncountable nouns like “energy” take singular verbs. “Have” is used with plural subjects or “I/you/we/they.”
“it don’t make pollution”	Subject-verb agreement + contraction	“it doesn’t make pollution”	Third person singular requires “doesn’t” (does not), not “don’t” (do not).
“it is very danger”	Word form	“it is very dangerous”	After “be” verbs, use adjectives (dangerous), not nouns (danger). Danger is the noun; dangerous is the adjective.
“nuclear power has problems too” (then) “The biggest problem is it is very danger”	Sentence structure	“The biggest problem is that it is very dangerous” OR “The biggest problem is its danger”	Use “that” to introduce a clause after “is” when the clause acts as a complement, or restructure using a noun.
“people cannot live in their houses anymore”	Word choice	“people cannot live in their homes anymore” OR “residents were displaced”	While understandable, “houses” is too simple for IELTS. “Homes” is better, or use more sophisticated vocabulary like “displaced residents.”
“nuclear waste is very danger and stay danger for long time”	Multiple errors: word form + verb tense + article	“nuclear waste is very dangerous and stays dangerous for a long time”	Needs adjective form “dangerous,” third person singular “stays,” and article “a” before “long time.”
“building nuclear plant cost too much money”	Article + subject-verb agreement	“building a nuclear plant costs too much money” OR “building nuclear plants costs too much money”	Countable singular nouns need articles (“a plant”). Gerund subjects (“building”) take singular verbs (“costs”).
“nuclear energy can be use”	Passive voice formation	“nuclear energy can be used”	Modal verbs + “be” require past participle form. The structure is: modal + be + past participle (used, not use).
“they are more safe”	Comparative form	“they are safer”	One-syllable adjectives form comparatives with “-er” (safer), not “more safe.” Use “more” with longer adjectives (more dangerous, more efficient).
“In conclusion, nuclear energy have good points”	Subject-verb agreement	“In conclusion, nuclear energy has good points”	Consistency error – same mistake as opening paragraph. Uncountable subjects require singular verbs.

Key Areas to Improve from Band 5-6 to Band 7:

1. Grammar accuracy: Master subject-verb agreement, especially with uncountable nouns and third-person singular. Practice using “that” clauses correctly after “be” verbs.

2. Vocabulary range: Replace basic words with more sophisticated alternatives (danger→hazard/risk, good→beneficial/advantageous, bad→detrimental/adverse). Learn proper word forms (danger/dangerous/endanger).

3. Sentence complexity: Move beyond simple sentences by using subordinating conjunctions (although, despite, whereas), relative clauses (which, that, who), and participle phrases.

4. Development depth: Instead of stating “it can kill many people,” explain “nuclear accidents can cause immediate casualties from radiation exposure and long-term health consequences including cancer rates in affected populations.”

5. Cohesive devices: Replace repetitive “Also” and “But” with varied transitions: furthermore, moreover, in addition, nevertheless, conversely, consequently.

6. Specific examples: Rather than “in Japan there was big accident,” write “the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi disaster, triggered by a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and tsunami.”

When comparing different energy sources in your essays, consider examining advantages of using renewable energy sources to strengthen your arguments about alternative options to nuclear power.

Essential Vocabulary for Nuclear Energy Essays

Word/Phrase	Type	Pronunciation	Definition	Example & Collocations
radioactive waste	noun phrase	/ˌreɪ.di.əʊˈæk.tɪv weɪst/	Nuclear material that remains hazardous after use	“The safe disposal of radioactive waste remains unresolved.” Collocations: dispose of/store/manage radioactive waste, radioactive waste disposal/storage
baseload power	noun phrase	/ˈbeɪs.ləʊd ˈpaʊər/	Minimum level of electricity demand supplied continuously	“Nuclear plants provide reliable baseload power unlike intermittent renewables.” Collocations: provide/generate/supply baseload power, reliable baseload power
nuclear fission	noun phrase	/ˈnjuː.kli.ər ˈfɪʃ.ən/	Process of splitting atomic nuclei to release energy	“Energy is generated through nuclear fission reactions.” Collocations: nuclear fission process/reaction/energy
carbon footprint	noun phrase	/ˈkɑː.bən ˈfʊt.prɪnt/	Total greenhouse gas emissions caused by an activity	“Nuclear energy has a minimal carbon footprint during operation.” Collocations: reduce/minimize/lower carbon footprint, low/high carbon footprint
catastrophic failure	noun phrase	/ˌkæt.əˈstrɒf.ɪk ˈfeɪ.ljər/	Complete and disastrous breakdown or accident	“Catastrophic failure at Chernobyl caused widespread contamination.” Collocations: prevent/avoid catastrophic failure, risk of catastrophic failure
inherent risks	noun phrase	/ɪnˈhɪə.rənt rɪsks/	Dangers that are natural or permanent parts of something	“The inherent risks of nuclear technology cannot be eliminated entirely.” Collocations: inherent risks/dangers/hazards, pose inherent risks
energy security	noun phrase	/ˈen.ə.dʒi sɪˈkjʊə.rə.ti/	Uninterrupted availability of energy at affordable prices	“Diversified nuclear power enhances national energy security.” Collocations: improve/ensure/threaten energy security, national energy security
to decommission	verb	/ˌdiː.kəˈmɪʃ.ən/	To close down and safely dismantle a nuclear facility	“Aging reactors must be decommissioned after 40-60 years of operation.” Collocations: decommission a plant/reactor/facility, decommissioning costs/process
proliferation	noun	/prəˌlɪf.əˈreɪ.ʃən/	Rapid increase or spread, especially of nuclear weapons	“Nuclear technology raises concerns about weapons proliferation.” Collocations: nuclear proliferation, prevent/stop proliferation, proliferation risks
uranium enrichment	noun phrase	/jʊˈreɪ.ni.əm ɪnˈrɪtʃ.mənt/	Process of increasing uranium-235 concentration for fuel	“Uranium enrichment facilities require strict international oversight.” Collocations: uranium enrichment process/facility/program
renewable alternatives	noun phrase	/rɪˈnjuː.ə.bəl ɔːlˈtɜː.nə.tɪvs/	Sustainable energy sources that can be naturally replenished	“Investment in renewable alternatives like solar and wind is increasing.” Collocations: explore/develop renewable alternatives, transition to renewable alternatives
mitigate risks	verb phrase	/ˈmɪt.ɪ.ɡeɪt rɪsks/	To reduce the severity or seriousness of dangers	“Modern reactor designs incorporate features to mitigate risks of accidents.” Collocations: mitigate/minimize/reduce risks, measures to mitigate risks
thermal pollution	noun phrase	/ˈθɜː.məl pəˈluː.ʃən/	Water temperature increase from industrial discharge	“Nuclear plants can cause thermal pollution in nearby water bodies.” Collocations: cause/prevent thermal pollution, thermal pollution effects
stringent regulations	noun phrase	/ˈstrɪn.dʒənt ˌreɡ.jəˈleɪ.ʃənz/	Extremely strict rules and requirements	“Stringent regulations govern nuclear facility construction and operation.” Collocations: impose/enforce stringent regulations, comply with stringent regulations
spent fuel	noun phrase	/spent fjuːəl/	Used nuclear fuel that has been removed from a reactor	“Spent fuel remains highly radioactive for thousands of years.” Collocations: spent fuel storage/disposal, reprocess spent fuel

These vocabulary items represent different registers and frequency levels appropriate for Band 6-9 essays. The higher-level terms (proliferation, decommission, mitigate) are particularly effective in Band 8-9 responses when used accurately and naturally.

Advanced nuclear reactor safety systems illustrating IELTS Writing energy security concepts

High-Scoring Sentence Structures

1. Complex Subordination with Concessive Clauses

Formula: While/Although/Though + [contrasting point], [main argument]

Example from Band 8-9 Essay: “While the risks are real and warrant serious consideration, the urgency of climate change necessitates embracing nuclear energy as a transitional solution.”

Why it scores well: This structure demonstrates sophistication by acknowledging complexity before presenting the main argument. It shows the writer can handle nuanced positions rather than absolute statements, which is characteristic of academic writing at Band 8-9.

Additional examples:

• “Although construction costs remain prohibitively expensive, the long-term operational efficiency of nuclear plants justifies the initial investment.”
• “While renewable energy sources offer sustainable alternatives, their intermittent nature prevents them from providing the consistent baseload power that modern economies require.”
• “Though nuclear accidents generate significant media attention, statistically, nuclear energy causes fewer deaths per unit of electricity generated than fossil fuels.”

Common mistakes to avoid:

• ❌ “While nuclear is dangerous, but we should use it” (don’t use “but” after “while”)
• ❌ “Although the risks, nuclear energy is beneficial” (need complete clause after “although”)
• ✓ “Although the risks are significant, nuclear energy offers substantial benefits”

2. Non-Defining Relative Clauses for Adding Information

Formula: [Noun], which/who/where + [additional information], [continuation]

Example from Band 8-9 Essay: “The Fukushima disaster in 2011 demonstrated how natural disasters can trigger nuclear crises with devastating long-term consequences, displacing over 150,000 residents and contaminating vast agricultural areas.”

Why it scores well: Non-defining relative clauses allow writers to incorporate supplementary information elegantly without creating choppy sentences. This structure shows control of punctuation (commas) and understanding of clause types, both indicators of advanced grammatical range.

Additional examples:

• “France, which derives approximately 70% of its electricity from nuclear plants, maintains one of Europe’s lowest carbon footprints.”
• “Generation III+ reactors, which incorporate passive safety systems that function without human intervention, represent significant advances in nuclear technology.”
• “Radioactive waste, which remains hazardous for thousands of years, poses long-term environmental challenges that scientists have yet to fully resolve.”

Common mistakes to avoid:

• ❌ “France that gets 70% power from nuclear…” (should use “which” for non-defining clauses about things)
• ❌ “Reactors which are safer now, they have new features” (no comma before defining clause; don’t repeat subject with “they”)
• ✓ “Modern reactors, which are considerably safer, incorporate multiple redundant safety systems”

For deeper understanding of how nuclear power contributes to national stability, you can examine advantages of nuclear power for energy security, which explores strategic benefits often discussed in IELTS essays.

3. Participle Phrases for Sentence Variety

Formula: [Present/Past participle phrase], [main clause] OR [Main clause], [participle phrase]

Example from Band 8-9 Essay: “Unlike fossil fuel plants, nuclear reactors produce virtually no greenhouse gases during operation, making them invaluable in combating climate change.”

Why it scores well: Participle phrases allow writers to express cause-effect relationships, simultaneous actions, or additional details without using multiple simple sentences. This structure demonstrates sophisticated grammatical control and creates more flowing, natural academic prose.

Additional examples:

• “Recognizing the limitations of renewable energy, many governments continue investing in nuclear infrastructure.”
• “Having witnessed the Chernobyl disaster, the international community established stricter safety protocols for nuclear facilities.”
• “Nuclear power plants operate continuously, providing reliable electricity regardless of weather conditions.”
• “Faced with escalating energy demands, developing nations must consider nuclear energy alongside renewable alternatives.”

Common mistakes to avoid:

• ❌ “Providing clean energy, and nuclear power is efficient” (don’t add “and” – the participle phrase already connects ideas)
• ❌ “Being dangerous, we shouldn’t use nuclear energy” (dangling modifier – who/what is dangerous?)
• ✓ “Being inherently dangerous, nuclear technology requires stringent safety protocols”

4. Cleft Sentences for Emphasis

Formula: It is [noun/adjective] that + [clause] OR What [clause] is [noun/phrase]

Example from Band 8-9 Essay: “It is the immediate threat posed by global warming that arguably surpasses the statistical risk of nuclear accidents.”

Why it scores well: Cleft sentences allow writers to emphasize particular information by restructuring normal sentence order. This demonstrates awareness of information structure and rhetorical effect, showing sophisticated control beyond basic grammatical accuracy.

Additional examples:

• “It is the problem of radioactive waste disposal that remains the most significant challenge facing nuclear energy.”
• “What distinguishes nuclear power from renewable sources is its ability to provide consistent baseload electricity.”
• “It was the Fukushima disaster that fundamentally changed public perception of nuclear safety in Asia.”
• “What proponents of nuclear energy often overlook is the enormous decommissioning costs after 40-60 years of operation.”

Common mistakes to avoid:

• ❌ “It is safety is the biggest concern” (incorrect structure after “it is”)
• ❌ “What nuclear power provides is that consistent energy” (don’t use “that” after “is” in what-clefts)
• ✓ “What nuclear power provides is consistent, reliable energy”
• ✓ “It is safety that remains the primary concern for most citizens”

5. Advanced Conditionals (Mixed and Inversion)

Formula: Had [subject] + [past participle], [subject] would/could + [have + past participle] OR Should [subject] + [base verb], [subject] will/would + [base verb]

Example from Band 8-9 Essay: “Had the international community invested more heavily in renewable infrastructure decades ago, our dependence on nuclear energy would perhaps be less pronounced today.”

Why it scores well: Advanced conditional structures demonstrate control of complex tense relationships and hypothetical reasoning. Mixed conditionals and inversions are particularly impressive as they’re rarely used by intermediate learners, clearly signaling Band 8-9 proficiency.

Additional examples:

• “Should governments implement more stringent safety regulations, public acceptance of nuclear power would likely increase.”
• “Were renewable energy technologies more advanced, the nuclear energy debate might be irrelevant.”
• “Had the Fukushima plant been equipped with higher seawalls, the catastrophic meltdown could have been prevented.”
• “Should a major nuclear accident occur in a densely populated region, the humanitarian consequences would be unprecedented.”

Common mistakes to avoid:

• ❌ “If the accident would have been prevented, people would be safe” (don’t use “would” in the if-clause)
• ❌ “Had they build better plants, accidents wouldn’t happen” (use past participle “built,” not base form)
• ✓ “Had they built safer plants, many accidents could have been prevented”
• ✓ “Should nuclear technology continue advancing, safety concerns may diminish over time”

6. Nominalization for Academic Tone

Formula: Convert verb phrases into noun phrases: [Verb + object] → [Noun form + of + object]

Example from Band 8-9 Essay: “The implementation of stringent regulatory oversight and continued investment in renewable alternatives are essential conditions for supporting nuclear energy.”

Why it scores well: Nominalization—converting verbs into nouns—creates the formal, abstract tone characteristic of academic writing. This technique allows writers to express complex ideas more concisely and demonstrates sophisticated control of word formation and academic register.

Additional examples:

Verb-based (Band 6)	Nominalized (Band 8-9)
“We need to dispose of radioactive waste safely”	“The safe disposal of radioactive waste remains a critical challenge”
“Nuclear plants emit very little carbon”	“The minimal carbon emissions from nuclear plants make them attractive”
“If we develop renewable energy, we won’t need nuclear power”	“The development of renewable energy could eventually eliminate our dependence on nuclear power”
“We must maintain nuclear facilities properly”	“Proper maintenance of nuclear facilities is essential for preventing accidents”

Additional nominalization examples:

• “The decommissioning of aging reactors requires specialized expertise and substantial financial resources.”
• “Public opposition to nuclear power stems largely from concerns about the accumulation of radioactive waste.”
• “The expansion of nuclear energy capacity depends on the availability of uranium reserves and processing facilities.”

Common mistakes to avoid:

• ❌ “The building of nuclear plants are expensive” (subject is singular “building,” needs “is”)
• ❌ “Implementation nuclear safety is important” (needs “of” → “implementation of nuclear safety”)
• ✓ “The implementation of nuclear safety protocols is paramount”
• ❌ “For prevention of accidents, we need good systems” (awkward; better to keep verb form here)
• ✓ “To prevent accidents, we need robust safety systems” OR “Accident prevention requires robust safety systems”

When to use nominalization:

• When discussing abstract concepts, policies, or processes
• In thesis statements and topic sentences
• When you want to sound more formal and academic
• To create cohesion by using the same grammatical subject across sentences

When to avoid nominalization:

• When it makes sentences unnecessarily complex or unclear
• When you need to specify who is performing an action
• In conclusions where direct language is more impactful
• When the verb form is already sophisticated enough

Self-Assessment Checklist

Before Writing (2-3 minutes)

Question Analysis:

• [ ] Have I identified the question type? (Discussion/Opinion/Problem-Solution/Two-part)
• [ ] Have I underlined the key instruction words? (discuss, agree/disagree, advantages/disadvantages)
• [ ] Do I understand ALL parts of the question I must address?
• [ ] Have I identified any limiting words? (future energy demands, developing countries, young people)
• [ ] Can I think of 2-3 specific examples for each perspective?

Planning:

• [ ] Have I decided my clear position/opinion?
• [ ] Have I outlined 4-5 paragraphs with distinct purposes?
• [ ] Does each body paragraph have ONE clear main idea?
• [ ] Have I allocated time? (5 min planning + 30 min writing + 5 min checking)
• [ ] Do I have topic-specific vocabulary ready to use?

While Writing (30 minutes)

Introduction (5 minutes):

• [ ] Have I paraphrased the question rather than copied it?
• [ ] Is my thesis statement clear and directly answers the question?
• [ ] Have I indicated what the essay will discuss?
• [ ] Is it 2-3 sentences (40-60 words)?

Body Paragraphs (18-20 minutes):

• [ ] Does each paragraph start with a clear topic sentence?
• [ ] Have I explained my main point thoroughly? (not just listing)
• [ ] Have I included specific examples or evidence?
• [ ] Am I using cohesive devices naturally? (not mechanically)
• [ ] Am I varying my sentence structures?
• [ ] Are my paragraphs roughly equal length? (70-100 words each)
• [ ] Do my ideas connect logically within and between paragraphs?

Conclusion (3-4 minutes):

• [ ] Have I restated my position clearly?
• [ ] Have I summarized the main points briefly?
• [ ] Have I avoided introducing completely new ideas?
• [ ] Is it proportionate? (not longer than introduction)

Language Use (Throughout):

• [ ] Am I using topic-specific vocabulary accurately?
• [ ] Am I attempting some complex sentences?
• [ ] Am I varying my vocabulary? (not repeating “nuclear energy” every sentence)
• [ ] Am I maintaining formal academic tone? (no contractions, slang, or overly emotional language)

After Writing (5 minutes)

Content Check:

• [ ] Have I fully answered ALL parts of the question?
• [ ] Is my position consistent throughout the essay?
• [ ] Are my arguments supported with specific examples?
• [ ] Have I reached 250+ words? (count if unsure – aim for 260-290)

Grammar Check:

• [ ] Subject-verb agreement correct? (especially with: nuclear energy has, the risks are)
• [ ] Article usage correct? (a/an/the, especially before singular countable nouns)
• [ ] Verb tenses consistent and appropriate?
• [ ] Have I checked for sentence fragments or run-ons?
• [ ] Plural forms correct? (country → countries, energy → energies?)

Vocabulary Check:

• [ ] Word forms correct? (danger → dangerous, safe → safety)
• [ ] Collocations natural? (make pollution ❌ → cause pollution ✓)
• [ ] Prepositions correct? (depends on, concerned about, solution to)
• [ ] No repetition of basic words like “good,” “bad,” “big”?

Mechanics Check:

• [ ] Capital letters used correctly? (countries, proper nouns, start of sentences)
• [ ] Punctuation correct? (commas in complex sentences, periods at sentence ends)
• [ ] Spelling accurate? (especially topic words like “radioactive,” “government,” “environment”)
• [ ] Paragraph indentation or spacing clear?

Final Read-Through:

• [ ] Read the essay from start to finish – does it flow logically?
• [ ] Would the examiner clearly understand my position?
• [ ] Does it sound natural, not memorized or robotic?

Time Management Tips

Timing breakdown for 40-minute task:

Phase	Time	Activity
Analysis & Planning	5 min	Understand question, brainstorm ideas, outline structure
Introduction	5 min	Write thesis and overview (40-60 words)
Body Paragraph 1	8-9 min	Develop first main point with examples (80-100 words)
Body Paragraph 2	8-9 min	Develop second main point with examples (80-100 words)
Conclusion	3-4 min	Summarize and restate position (40-50 words)
Review & Edit	5 min	Check grammar, vocabulary, task response

Time-saving strategies:

• Don’t aim for perfection in first draft – you can’t rewrite completely
• If you can’t spell a word, use a simpler synonym you’re confident about
• If a sentence becomes too complicated, split it into two simpler ones
• Don’t count words obsessively – if you write 4 well-developed paragraphs, you’ll likely exceed 250 words
• Save complex sentences for places where they’re most impactful (thesis statement, topic sentences)

What to do if running short on time:

• Prioritize finishing your conclusion – don’t leave it incomplete
• In conclusion, just restate your position and one key point from each body paragraph
• It’s better to have a complete 250-word essay than an incomplete 280-word essay
• Use simple but correct sentences rather than attempting complex structures you might make errors in

What to do if you have extra time:

• Don’t add new paragraphs or dramatically change your argument
• Focus on the checklist above – grammar, vocabulary, task response
• Read for clarity – would someone unfamiliar with the topic understand your points?
• Check your examples are specific enough (not “some countries” but “countries such as France”)

Conclusion

Mastering IELTS Writing Task 2 essays on nuclear energy requires understanding not just the topic itself, but how to structure arguments, deploy sophisticated vocabulary naturally, and demonstrate grammatical range accurately. The three sample essays presented here illustrate the concrete differences between band levels—from the basic task completion of Band 5-6, through the competent but less nuanced Band 6.5-7, to the sophisticated, precisely argued Band 8-9 response.

Key takeaways for improvement:

1. Task response is paramount – Even brilliant language won’t compensate for failing to fully address all parts of the question or maintain a consistent position
2. Specificity elevates band scores – Replace vague references with concrete data, named examples, and precise statistics
3. Natural sophistication trumps forced complexity – Band 8-9 essays use advanced structures seamlessly, not awkwardly inserted to impress
4. Vocabulary accuracy matters more than ambition – Using “efficient” correctly scores better than misusing “multifaceted”
5. Balance and nuance demonstrate critical thinking – Acknowledging complexity (“while risks exist, benefits may outweigh them”) shows mature reasoning

Your path to improvement:

• Weeks 1-2: Focus on task response – practice analyzing questions and planning complete responses that address every requirement
• Weeks 3-4: Build topic vocabulary – create word banks for common IELTS themes (energy, environment, technology, education) with collocations
• Weeks 5-6: Master sentence structures – practice the six patterns outlined above until they become natural
• Weeks 7-8: Timed practice – write complete essays under exam conditions, then carefully compare to model answers

Realistic timeline for improvement:

• Band 5 to 6: 2-3 months with consistent practice (3-4 essays per week)
• Band 6 to 7: 3-4 months focusing on vocabulary range and grammatical accuracy
• Band 7 to 8: 4-6 months refining sophistication, coherence, and precision
• Band 8 to 9: 6+ months of intensive practice with expert feedback on nuanced language use

Remember that improvement isn’t linear – you might write a Band 7 essay one day and Band 6.5 the next as you experiment with new structures. This is normal and part of the learning process. Consistency comes with practice.

Take action now:

1. Choose one of the essay questions mentioned in this article
2. Set a 40-minute timer and write your response without looking at the samples
3. Compare your essay to the appropriate band level sample
4. Identify THREE specific areas to improve (e.g., “use more participle phrases,” “include specific data in examples,” “improve subject-verb agreement”)
5. Share your essay or questions in the comments below – learning is most effective when collaborative

Additional resources for continued practice:

• Official IELTS practice materials from British Council and IDP
• Cambridge IELTS practice test books (12-17 contain recent authentic questions)
• IELTS Liz and IELTS Simon websites for additional sample essays and tips
• Write regularly on r/IELTS_Guide for community feedback

For broader perspective on sustainable energy debates relevant to IELTS Writing, exploring the importance of space research in exploring alternative energy sources can provide unique angles for your essays that demonstrate wider knowledge.

The journey to your target band score begins with understanding where you currently stand and taking deliberate, focused steps forward. Use these samples not as templates to memorize, but as benchmarks to understand the standards you’re working toward. With dedicated practice and attention to the specific feedback in this guide, you can systematically improve your IELTS Writing Task 2 performance.

What band score are you currently achieving, and what’s your target? What specific challenges are you facing with nuclear energy or similar discussion-opinion questions? Share your experiences below—your questions might help other learners too.