The US, Russia and China are stepping up efforts to send nuclear reactors to the Moon in a competition involving space exploration, control of lunar resources and geopolitical influence.
Të lidhura
None found
The plans of the three powers mark a new stage in the race for the Moon. Nuclear energy is seen as a way to power future bases and support long-term missions on the lunar surface.
NASA aims to have a reactor ready for launch by December 2030, to be deployed near the Moon’s south pole. Russia, in cooperation with China, plans to install a similar system by 2036.
These projects are part of an effort to build permanent bases, exploit resources such as frozen water, and turn the Moon into a launch point for expeditions to Mars and other parts of the Solar System.
Securing energy remains one of the main obstacles to the long-term operation of lunar bases.
Solar panels can produce energy only during periods of sunlight, while night on the Moon lasts more than two Earth weeks. In areas near the south pole, temperatures can range from around 54 degrees Celsius to -203 degrees Celsius.
Unlike solar panels, nuclear reactors can provide uninterrupted energy and do not depend on the presence of sunlight. For this reason, they are considered suitable for a base that must operate for long periods.
The American Lunar Reactor 1 is expected to generate around 20 kilowatts of electricity and operate for five years without the need for human intervention.
The Russian Selena project has been designed to produce up to 10 kilowatts and operate autonomously for around a decade.
NASA has accelerated its plans because of concerns that a system developed by Russia and China could give those countries a strategic advantage on the Moon.
Washington also fears that placing a reactor in a specific area could be followed by the creation of a de facto restricted zone for other actors.
The focus of the competition is not only energy production. Control of resource-rich territories, particularly water-ice deposits near the south pole, could be decisive for future missions.
Water could be used for consumption, for producing oxygen and hydrogen, and for creating rocket fuel outside Earth.
However, plans to deploy nuclear reactors on the Moon have raised concerns among experts.
The greatest risk is associated with the transport phase. The US and Russia say the reactors will remain deactivated during the journey to the Moon, but an accident during rocket launch could have unpredictable consequences.
One worrying scenario is a reactor crashing into the sea. Under certain circumstances, water could affect neutron processes and increase the risk of a nuclear reaction.
The case of the Soviet satellite Kosmos 954 in 1978 remains an important precedent. The device, which carried a nuclear power source, re-entered the atmosphere uncontrollably and scattered radioactive material across around 124,000 square kilometers in northern Canada.
Another controversial incident took place in Russia in 2019, when an experimental rocket crashed into the White Sea. American experts linked the incident to a nuclear propulsion system, while Moscow denied that explanation.
The consequences of an accident on the Moon would differ from those of an incident on Earth.
Without an atmosphere and with much lower gravity, materials released by an explosion could spread over considerable distances.
This would raise questions about the safety of astronauts and vehicles operating nearby.
Experts warn that such an event could leave behind radioactive contaminated areas unsuitable for astronauts and equipment for a long time.
The end of the reactor’s operating cycle also presents difficulties. On Earth, decommissioning requires a complex process that can take years, while plans for the Moon envisage radioactive materials remaining there after the reactor stops operating.
NASA intends to use HALEU, low-enriched uranium with a high assay, which is considered a safer alternative to highly enriched uranium.
However, the US supply capacity for HALEU remains limited.
The issue is further complicated by the fact that Russia is one of the leading producers of this type of uranium, while the US has restricted imports of Russian uranium since 2024 because of the war in Ukraine.
Russia and China have not published all the details concerning the fuel they plan to use in their lunar reactors.
The sector is also attracting American private companies.
Space Nuclear Power Corporation is one of the companies that could compete for NASA’s contract. Meanwhile, the Pentagon has selected Antares to develop and demonstrate a microreactor for use in space.
Microreactors could offer a solution for supplying future bases, but it has not yet been fully proven that such a system can withstand the Moon’s extreme conditions.
Scientists must address issues such as heat management, radiation protection and maintaining the structural stability of the reactor.
Beyond the technical challenges, these projects carry clear geopolitical significance.
The US, China and Russia aim to secure a dominant position in the next phase of lunar exploration. A stable energy source could represent a key step toward building permanent bases.
However, experts consider the announced timelines overly ambitious. So far, no country has a fully tested system capable of safely transporting a heavy reactor to the lunar surface.
The main question is not only which power will be the first to send a reactor to the Moon, but also whether this race will unfold through rivalry or international cooperation.
Experts have warned that combining space competition with nuclear technology could make the next chapter of lunar exploration more powerful, but also more dangerous.
