NASA is accelerating efforts to build a nuclear power station on the Moon by the end of this decade, according to multiple US media reports. The ambitious project aims to support a long-term human presence on the lunar surface, as competition intensifies between spacefaring nations.
Acting NASA chief Sean Duffy, appointed by President Donald Trump, emphasized the urgency of developing reliable lunar power sources. In a letter reportedly seen by The New York Times, Duffy warned that rival countries like China and Russia could establish territorial claims on parts of the Moon, calling for immediate action from the US space agency.
Small Reactor, Big Mission
NASA is now seeking proposals from private companies to design a reactor capable of generating at least 100 kilowatts of power — enough to sustain a small lunar base, but modest in comparison to Earth-based generators. For context, a typical wind turbine generates 2-3 megawatts.
Although the concept of nuclear energy in space isn’t new, this marks the most aggressive timeline yet. Back in 2022, NASA funded three early design contracts, each worth $5 million. Meanwhile, China and Russia announced in May that they plan to build their own automated nuclear station on the Moon by 2035.
Why Nuclear?
Solar energy on the Moon poses challenges due to the long lunar day-night cycle — about 14 Earth days of sunlight followed by 14 days of darkness. That makes it nearly impossible to rely solely on solar power for continuous operations.
“Nuclear energy is not just desirable, it is inevitable,” said Dr. Sungwoo Lim, a senior lecturer in space systems at the University of Surrey. He explained that powering even a modest habitat on the Moon would require megawatt-scale energy — far beyond what current solar and battery systems can offer.
Dr. Lionel Wilson, a planetary scientist at Lancaster University, agreed that deploying a small nuclear reactor by 2030 is feasible — but only with strong financial and logistical backing through NASA’s Artemis program, which is aimed at establishing a human return to the Moon.
Safety and Skepticism
The proposal is not without concerns. Launching radioactive materials into space requires special licenses and risk mitigation strategies, especially during liftoff. While experts say the process is technically manageable, it adds complexity to mission planning.
More broadly, critics worry the project may be motivated more by politics than science. NASA has recently faced steep budget cuts, including a 24% reduction for 2026 that could impact key missions like the Mars Sample Return.
“There’s a concern that we’re returning to Cold War-era space rivalry,” said Dr. Simeon Barber, a planetary scientist at the Open University. “While competition can drive innovation, it can also shift focus away from collaborative exploration.”
Dr. Barber also raised questions about the Artemis Accords — a set of international agreements signed by several countries to guide lunar cooperation. These include provisions for “safety zones” around equipment and installations on the Moon, which some see as a potential way to assert territorial control.
“If you build a reactor or a base, you could argue for a protective zone around it. That starts to resemble staking a claim,” he said.
Still a Long Way to Go
Despite the urgency, NASA’s timeline faces major hurdles. Artemis 3, which is expected to carry astronauts back to the Moon in 2027, has already experienced delays and funding uncertainty.
“There’s no point having a nuclear reactor ready if there’s no way to transport people or infrastructure to use it,” said Dr. Barber. “Right now, the pieces of the plan don’t seem fully connected.”
As the space race heats up, one thing is clear: the Moon is no longer just a symbolic goal. It’s the next frontier for geopolitical strategy, scientific exploration, and commercial opportunity — and the clock is ticking.
Image Source: Google
Image Credit: Respective Owner
