If Duffy is serious about his stated objective, then he and the president must work more effectively to integrate SpaceX and other private space startups more fully into NASA.
Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy, who has recently taken over as interim Director of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), says the United States will be streamlining the construction of a nuclear reactor on the moon within the decade. This is likely a response to China’s ambitious plans for lunar colonization and eventual resource exploitation.
Sean Duffy’s War on SpaceX
Duffy is right to be worried about Chinese encroachment on the moon. Indeed, it is likely that, under current conditions, the Chinese will successfully land their taikonauts on the lunar surface and establish a foothold there long before the Americans do.
But Duffy’s statements about putting a nuclear reactor on the moon are taking place even as Duffy is waging a political war against Elon Musk’s SpaceX rocket company and gutting key personnel from NASA. These personnel would be vital for any mission of the kind Duffy is proposing; without them, his grandiose plan is little more than a pipe dream.
Remember, without SpaceX, NASA lacks the heavy-lift capacity to place astronauts permanently on the moon. And with Duffy gutting NASA and threatening SpaceX’s contracts out of a desire to inflict pain on Musk, there will be no Americans or US nuclear reactors getting to the lunar surface in any meaningful timeline.
Why Put a Nuclear Reactor on the Moon?
To be clear, Duffy’s idea is a good one. Having a nuclear reactor on the moon would significantly advance US lunar ambitions; it would provide a reliable, high-output energy source that overcomes the limitations of solar power, enabling sustained human presence and operations. The moon experiences extreme conditions, including 14-Earth-day-long nights with no sunlight, intense temperature swings, and dust storms that can obscure solar panels.
A nuclear fission reactor would deliver constant baseload power—ideally at least 40 kilowatts initially, scalable for larger needs—independent of sunlight or location, ensuring uninterrupted operations for habitats, rovers, and equipment. Advanced nuclear reactors are compact, require little maintenance, and can operate for more than ten years—without refueling, reducing logistical burdens.
As part of NASA’s Artemis program, a reactor would power permanent outposts near the lunar south pole, where water ice deposits exist. This energy could facilitate in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), such as electrolyzing water for oxygen and hydrogen fuel, reducing dependency on Earth supplies and cutting mission costs.
Having a nuclear reactor on the lunar surface would enable advanced research, including telescopes, geological surveys, and biological experiments, while powering life support systems, communications, and robotics. This aligns with US goals for a sustained human presence by the late 2020s or early 2030s, potentially turning the moon into a staging ground for Mars missions.
Per Duffy’s memo, the US aims to deploy the nuclear reactor by around 2030—ahead of similar efforts by China and Russia, who are collaborating on lunar nuclear power. This would help secure strategic lunar real estate, protect US interests in space resources, and demonstrate technological superiority in the emerging space race. More importantly, lessons from lunar development would inform nuclear systems for Mars, where dust storms and greater distances from the sun make solar power even less feasible. NASA’s plans include demonstrating a reactor on the moon to validate designs for multi-year, autonomous operation in harsh environments.
NASA Needs the Private Sector
NASA has an ongoing “Fission Surface Power Initiative,” which is related to their ongoing Artemis program. Yet these programs have been running in some fashion for a decade, and have been on the drawing board even longer. NASA can’t seem to get these projects off the ground without the injections of innovation that private space firms, notably SpaceX, provide NASA.
If Duffy is serious about his stated objective, then both he and the president must work more effectively to integrate SpaceX and other private space startups more fully into NASA—a step that would require them to overcome petty political animosity with Musk—and streamline the overall manned spaceflight program there. Otherwise, the administration’s ambition to place a reactor on the moon by the end of the decade is little more than hot air.
About the Author: Brandon J. Weichert
Brandon J. Weichert, a Senior National Security Editor at The National Interest as well as a contributor at Popular Mechanics, who consults regularly with various government institutions and private organizations on geopolitical issues. Weichert’s writings have appeared in multiple publications, including the Washington Times, National Review, The American Spectator, MSN, the Asia Times, and countless others. His books include Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower, Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life, and The Shadow War: Iran’s Quest for Supremacy. His newest book, A Disaster of Our Own Making: How the West Lost Ukraine is available for purchase wherever books are sold. He can be followed via Twitter @WeTheBrandon.
Image: Shutterstock / Joshua Sukoff.
