NASA’s Plan for a Nuclear Reactor on the Moon May Be a Lunar Land Seize
Spurred by competitors from China and Russia, the Trump administration is pushing for nuclear energy on the moon by 2030
NASA’s performing administrator Sean Duffy testifies throughout a congressional listening to on July 16, 2025.
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Name, Inc by way of Getty Photographs
NASA might quickly go nuclear on the moon.
The house company’s performing administrator Sean Duffy has issued a directive to expedite constructing a nuclear reactor on the lunar floor. Duffy, a former Fox Information host, can also be head of the U.S. Division of Transportation, and he took over management of NASA in July after the Trump administration pulled its nomination of personal astronaut and businessperson Jared Isaacman.
The directive, first reported by Politico, would speed up NASA’s long-simmering—and, so far, largely fruitless—efforts to develop nuclear reactors to help house science and exploration.
On supporting science journalism
In case you’re having fun with this text, contemplate supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By buying a subscription you might be serving to to make sure the way forward for impactful tales concerning the discoveries and concepts shaping our world in the present day.
The house company has pursued varied initiatives over time, most just lately in 2022, when it awarded three $5-million contracts to firms to craft designs for small space-ready reactors meant for lunar operations within the mid-2030s. Impressed partially by an area coverage directive issued by President Donald Trump throughout his first time period, these reactors had been meant to supply 40 kilowatts of energy—sufficient to maintain a small workplace constructing—and to weigh lower than six metric tons. Duffy’s directive is extra bold: it requires NASA to solicit proposals for reactors that may yield a minimum of 100 kilowatts of energy and be prepared for launch by late 2029. The house company is tasked with appointing an official to supervise the trouble inside 30 days and to problem its solicitation inside 60 days.
An idea illustration exhibiting NASA’s Fission Floor Energy Undertaking on the moon. Beneath a brand new directive, the house company is searching for to develop greater and extra highly effective nuclear reactors that would attain the lunar floor by 2030.
Lunar nights are very lengthy—two Earth weeks—and perilously chilly, making nuclear energy fascinating for floor operations. However in accordance with the directive, the larger impetus for the fast-tracked plan is a burgeoning partnership between China and Russia to construct a nuclear-powered outpost close to the moon’s south pole by the mid-2030s. The solar by no means crests excessive above the horizon there, leaving some craters in everlasting shadow—and priceless deposits of water ice lacing their eternally darkish flooring. Regardless of its cryogenic chill, this lunar area is hotly contested, with NASA’s Artemis program additionally focusing on crewed landings there as early as 2027 as a part of the Artemis III mission.
Moreover offering considerable electrical energy for floor operations, a nuclear reactor on the moon might additionally permit for a strategic lunar land seize. Possession of otherworldly territory is prohibited, in accordance with the United Nations Outer House Treaty, however the treaty additionally obliges spacefaring powers to train “due regard” of their actions, that means that they need to not encroach on or intervene with delicate infrastructure constructed by others. A nuclear reactor positioned on the lunar floor, subsequently, might permit the declaration of what Duffy’s directive calls a “keep-out zone.”
Though the Trump administration’s acceleration of NASA’s nuclear-power efforts could also be welcomed by many space-exploration advocates, it comes alongside different proposals from the White Home that search to radically reshape the house company and that may very well be at cross-purposes with the brand new directive. These embody plans for terribly deep cuts to NASA’s science packages, in addition to an energetic and ongoing culling of the house company’s workforce. The president’s price range request for fiscal 12 months 2026 notably zeroes out funding for a joint program between NASA and the Division of Protection to develop nuclear rocketry. It will additionally wind down the house company’s capability to construct and deploy radioisotope energy sources, which supply nuclear-derived warmth and electrical energy sans complicated and heavy reactors for robotic missions to the outer planets and different sunlight-sparse elements of the photo voltaic system.
The most important query going through NASA’s newest nuclear foray, nonetheless, could also be what these notional new reactors would truly energy. Many specialists say a 2027 launch for Artemis III is unlikely and citing elements similar to the continued difficulties of creating a requisite lunar lander based mostly on SpaceX’s Starship rocket. With every logistical misstep or schedule delay, extra Artemis missions that may put extra significant and power-hungry infrastructure on the moon slip additional over the horizon, probably making the complete program extra weak to extra rounds of price range cuts—and even outright cancellation by future administrations.
It’s Time to Stand Up for Science
Earlier than you shut the web page, we have to ask on your help. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and trade for 180 years, and we predict proper now’s essentially the most crucial second in that two-century historical past.
We’re not asking for charity. In case you change into a Digital, Print or Limitless subscriber to Scientific American, you’ll be able to assist be sure that our protection is centered on significant analysis and discovery; that we’ve the sources to report on the selections that threaten labs throughout the U.S.; and that we help each future and dealing scientists at a time when the worth of science itself usually goes unrecognized. Click on right here to subscribe.
