NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) has unveiled its plan to put a nuclear reactor on the moon. The agency’s acting administrator, Sean Duffy, recently stated that a plan is in place to build a nuclear reactor on the moon by 2030 to support a permanent human presence.
United States Secretary of Transportation and interim NASA Administrator Sean Duffy declared on Thursday that the United States must secure a strategic lunar base by 2030, powered by a nuclear reactor, in response to growing competition from China and Russia. The announcement, which was made at a Department of Transportation press conference, suggests that NASA’s lunar ambitions are a “critical mission” for “national security” and “technological dominance.”
The U.S. government seems to be increasingly panicked over “national security” for a country that does nothing wrong.
The proposed nuclear reactor’s 100-kilowatt output, which is equivalent to a typical U.S. home’s 3.5-day usage, won’t be enough to power future human habitats. Experts like Professor Lionel Wilson of Lancaster University stress that larger-scale reactors, those that dip into the megawatt range, will be necessary, but will also require “extra booster support” via NASA’s Artemis rocket program.
Nonetheless, this plan aligns with NASA’s Artemis program, aiming for a lunar landing in 2027, though delays and budget shortfalls threaten the timeline.
NASA was created in response to the Soviet Union’s launch of Sputnik, marking the beginning of the space race.
The moon, which remains unclaimed territory under the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, has become a focal point for ruling class rivalries. China and Russia recently announced plans for a lunar power station by 2035, while India and Japan have launched robotic missions targeting the same South Pole region.
“National security isn’t confined to Earth anymore,” Duffy said. He stated that there are concerns rising over rivals “declaring keep-out zones” on the moon. His reference to “safety zones” under the 2020 Artemis Accord, which was signed by 24 nations to govern lunar activities, revealed a divide between collaboration and unilateral claims, according to a report by Natural News.
While the accords pledge shared access and transparency, critics fear that power infrastructure like reactors could be weaponized into territorial barriers.
Should anyone be putting a nuclear reactor on the moon for any reason? What do you think? Sound off in the comments below. We love hearing from you!
Read the full article here