NASA will accelerate plans to build a nuclear reactor on the Moon by 2030, five years ahead of a joint Chinese-Russian timeline, according to internal documents obtained by US media outlets.
Acting NASA administrator Sean Duffy, who also serves as Transportation Secretary, issued directives on 31 July calling for proposals from commercial companies to build a 100-kilowatt reactor within sixty days. The accelerated timeline comes as the space agency faces unprecedented budget cuts of 24 per cent for fiscal year 2026, reducing funding from $24.8 billion (£19.2 billion) to $18.8 billion (£14.5 billion).
“To properly advance this critical technology to be able to support a future lunar economy, high power energy generation on Mars, and to strengthen our national security in space, it is imperative the agency move quickly,” Duffy wrote in the directive, according to documents seen by The New York Times and Politico.
The move reflects growing concerns that China and Russia could establish dominance on the lunar surface through their joint International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) programme, which aims to deploy a nuclear reactor between 2033 and 2035.
Geopolitical Space Race Intensifies
Duffy’s directive explicitly warned that the first nation to establish a reactor could “declare a keep-out zone which would significantly inhibit the United States,” highlighting fears about potential territorial claims on the Moon.
China and Russia signed a memorandum of cooperation in May 2025 to build a nuclear power plant on the Moon by 2036. The reactor would power their jointly operated ILRS, which has attracted seventeen countries including Egypt, Pakistan, Venezuela, Thailand, and South Africa to join the programme.
It is about winning the second space race,” a senior NASA official told Politico, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Yury Borisov, director general of Russia’s space agency Roscosmos, announced in March 2024 that the reactor would likely be constructed autonomously “without the presence of humans,” with technological solutions “almost ready.
Wu Weiren, chief designer of China’s lunar exploration programme, stated that Russia “leads the world” in space-based nuclear technology, positioning it ahead of the United States in this critical area.
Scientific Necessity for Lunar Power
Scientists broadly agree that nuclear power represents the most viable solution for sustained lunar operations. One lunar day equals four weeks on Earth, comprising two weeks of continuous sunlight followed by two weeks of darkness, making solar power alone insufficient for permanent bases.
Building even a modest lunar habitat to accommodate a small crew would demand megawatt-scale power generation. Solar arrays and batteries alone cannot reliably meet those demands,” said Dr Sungwoo Lim, senior lecturer in space applications at the University of Surrey.
“Nuclear energy is not just desirable, it is inevitable,” he added.
The proposed 100-kilowatt reactor represents a significant upgrade from NASA’s previous plans for a 40-kilowatt system. In 2022, the agency awarded three $5 million (£3.9 million) contracts to companies for reactor design work.
Professor Lionel Wilson of Lancaster University believes the 2030 target is technically achievable “given the commitment of enough money,” noting that small reactor designs already exist. “It’s just a matter of having enough Artemis launches to build the infrastructure on the Moon by then,” he said.
Budget Crisis Threatens Implementation
The nuclear reactor announcement comes amid the deepest funding crisis in NASA’s modern history. The Trump administration’s proposed 2026 budget would slash science programmes by 47 per cent and potentially eliminate approximately one-third of the agency’s workforce.
Major casualties include the Mars Sample Return mission, which would retrieve samples already collected by the Perseverance rover, and dozens of Earth observation satellites monitoring climate change. The budget also proposes retiring the Space Launch System rocket and Orion capsule after Artemis III, scheduled for 2027, and cancelling the Gateway lunar space station.
No spin will change the fact that this would end critical missions, dramatically scale back the workforce, and risk our scientific leadership around the globe,” said Representative George Whitesides, a California Democrat, on social media platform X.
The budget turmoil follows the abrupt withdrawal of billionaire Jared Isaacman’s nomination to lead NASA, reportedly due to his alliance with Elon Musk, who recently departed the administration after a falling out with President Trump.
Safety and Technical Challenges
Implementing a lunar nuclear reactor faces significant technical hurdles beyond funding constraints. Dr Simeon Barber, planetary science specialist at the Open University, highlighted safety concerns about launching radioactive material through Earth’s atmosphere.
“You have to have a special licence to do that, but it is not insurmountable,” Barber said.
The reactor must operate in an environment with no atmosphere, extreme temperature swings ranging from minus 173 degrees Celsius to 127 degrees Celsius, and prolonged periods without sunlight. Engineers must also address challenges including autonomous deployment, resistance to lunar dust, thermal equilibrium maintenance, and independent operation for at least a decade without human intervention.
Artemis Accords and Territorial Concerns
Duffy’s reference to potential “keep-out zones” relates to the Artemis Accords, an agreement signed by seven nations in 2020 establishing principles for lunar cooperation. The accords include provisions for “safety zones” around operations and assets on the Moon.
If you build a nuclear reactor or any kind of base on the Moon, you can then start claiming that you have a safety zone around it,” Dr Barber explained. “To some people, this is tantamount to, ‘we own this bit of the Moon, we’re going to operate here and you can’t come in.'”
China and Russia have not signed the Artemis Accords, instead pursuing their separate ILRS programme with its own international partners.
Political Motivation Questioned
Scientists express concern that the accelerated timeline reflects geopolitical competition rather than scientific priorities. The announcement follows recent testimony where Duffy told Fox News that “very specific areas of the Moon are critical” and whoever arrives first “gets to plant their flag.
“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,” said Dr Barber.
“Competition can create innovation, 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,” he added.
Uncertain Path Forward
The feasibility of the 2030 target remains questionable given NASA’s current challenges. Artemis III, which aims to return humans to the lunar surface for the first time since 1972, has already faced multiple delays and now targets 2027 at the earliest.
Dr Barber noted the disconnect between ambitious nuclear plans and basic mission capabilities: “If you’ve got nuclear power for a base, but you’ve got no way of getting people and equipment there, then it’s not much use. The plans don’t appear very joined up at the moment.”
Despite the challenges, Duffy has instructed NASA to designate a project leader within thirty days and solicit industry proposals within sixty days. The agency plans to award at least two companies, preferably three or four, contracts within six months.
As the US, China, and Russia accelerate their lunar ambitions, the race to establish the first nuclear reactor on the Moon has become a defining battleground in what officials openly describe as the “second space race.” Whether NASA can achieve its ambitious 2030 target whilst navigating severe budget constraints and political turbulence remains to be seen.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
