Sean Duffy accelerates plan for lunar nuclear reactor

In a recent development revealed through documents obtained by Politico, NASA’s interim administrator, Sean Duffy, has accelerated plans to deploy a 100-kilowatt (100kW) nuclear reactor on the Moon. The directive orders the agency to solicit industry proposals for the reactor and sets an aggressive 2030 launch timeline, aiming to establish a sustainable human presence on the lunar surface while countering the rising influence of China.

The concept of building a nuclear reactor on the Moon isn’t new. In a 2024 statement, Trudy Kortes, NASA’s Technology Demonstration Missions program director, noted that a nuclear power source is essential for long-term exploration due to the long lunar nights, which last approximately 14 Earth days and render solar power unreliable.

Back in 2022, NASA awarded three $5 million contracts to commercial partners to develop initial reactor designs. Those designs focused on creating a small, fission-based system capable of generating only 40 kilowatts of electricity. Duffy’s new directive more than doubles that initial power goal.

The second space race

This project has gained renewed urgency under Duffy’s leadership of NASA, with geopolitical undertones reminiscent of the Cold War era. “It is about winning the second space race,” one senior NASA official told Politico. 

The 2030 deadline was reportedly chosen to coincide with China’s own ambitious goal of landing its first astronauts on the moon in the same timeframe. Space on the lunar surface is limited. As the directive states, according to Politico, the potential for other nations to build reactors first and establish “keep-out zones” could “significantly inhibit the United States.” Therefore, deploying a powerful American reactor before its competitors is a strategic imperative for the Trump administration.

This directive for a lunar reactor exists alongside a similar push from Duffy to accelerate the replacement of the International Space Station. NASA plans to award contracts for commercially run space stations within six months, aiming to replace the aging International Space Station by 2030. This urgency is driven by the goal of preventing a period where only China has a permanently crewed station in orbit, though some lawmakers are concerned that funding for interested companies is not being disbursed quickly enough.

This strategy is underpinned by the Artemis Accords, a non-binding international agreement led by the U.S. that establishes a framework for peaceful cooperation in space exploration. Currently signed by 56 nations, the Accords create a coalition of partners for lunar activities, though key players like China and Russia are not signatories. 

The principles outlined in the agreement govern activities such as the sharing of scientific data and the utilization of space resources, providing the political framework under which a shared power source like the reactor would operate.

These ambitious goals come at a time of unprecedented uncertainty for NASA, which is grappling with significant proposed budget cuts. The Trump administration’s budget would increase human spaceflight funding for 2026 while slashing science missions in half. This shift underscores what appears to be a broader agency pivot towards exploration and away from purely scientific endeavors under President Trump.

Technical challenges

Any nuclear reactor on the Moon would face numerous engineering hurdles.

First is the immense challenge of heat rejection. A nuclear reactor generates enormous waste heat, but in the vacuum of the Moon, there is no air or water to carry it away. One possible solution, outlined in NASA technical papers, is to radiate the heat directly into space using large, heavy panels. For a 100-kilowatt system, these radiators add significant mass and complexity, making the payload harder to launch.

Second is the harsh lunar environment itself. The Moon’s surface is covered in fine, abrasive dust called regolith that can coat equipment surfaces, like radiators, potentially reducing their ability to shed heat. The problematic nature of regolith was first seen during the Apollo missions, when NASA severely underestimated its effects during ground testing.

Third is the inherent risk of launching such a payload from Earth on a rocket, where vehicle failures can be catastrophic. As Simeon Barber, a planetary science specialist at the Open University, told the BBC, “Launching radioactive material through the Earth’s atmosphere brings safety concerns. You have to have a special license to do that, but it is not insurmountable.”

Beyond these technical issues are the logistical ones. Lionel Wilson of Lancaster University told the BBC that while the project is possible, it depends entirely on “having enough Artemis launches to build the infrastructure on the Moon by then,” a major uncertainty given the program’s delays, including several setbacks for SpaceX’s Starship, whose Human Landing System is integral to the Artemis missions.

Concerns over a competition-focused approach

This intense focus on competition, however, worries some scientists. “It seems that we’re going back into the old first space race days of competition, which, from a scientific perspective, is a little bit disappointing and concerning,” Barber told the BBC. 

He fears the larger goal of scientific discovery is at risk. “Competition can create innovation,” he adds, “but if there’s a narrower focus on national interest and on establishing ownership, then you can lose sight of the bigger picture, which is exploring the solar system and beyond.”