NASA and the US government have confirmed plans to put nuclear reactors on the Moon and in orbit around the Moon.
The space agency and the US Department of Energy announced in mid-January 2026 a "renewed commitment" for the research and development of a fission surface power system for use on the Moon.
It's intended that the scheme – known as NASA's Fission Surface Power Project – could facilitate NASA's Artemis programme to put humans permanently on the Moon, and also power onward crewed missions to Mars.
NASA and the Department of Energy have signed a "memorandum of understanding" to confirm collaboration on the project, NASA says, citing US President Trump’s "vision of American space superiority".
The plan is to deploy nuclear reactors both on the Moon and in orbit around the Moon, as well as the development of a lunar surface reactor, by 2030.
"This effort ensures the United States leads the world in space exploration and commerce," a statement from NASA says.
“Under President Trump’s national space policy, America is committed to returning to the Moon, building the infrastructure to stay and making the investments required for the next giant leap to Mars and beyond,” says NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman.
"Achieving this future requires harnessing nuclear power. This agreement enables closer collaboration between NASA and the Department of Energy to deliver the capabilities necessary to usher in the Golden Age of space exploration and discovery."
Funnelling funding for science?
However, some voices in the scientific community are not fully convinced by NASA's existing plans to put a nuclear reactor on the Moon.
Astrophysicist Ethan Siegel, writing for the website Big Think, points to the need for balance in funding across all of NASA's ongoing projects, in order that one doesn't syphon money away from the others.
Siegel says NASA would effectively be "eating their lunch" by pursuing such an enormous project within such a short timeline.
"A balanced portfolio prevents any one mission, no matter how important, from going over budget and diminishing needed funds to support the other important vital endeavours," Siegel writes.
"The great danger to a balanced portfolio, which ensures the maximum amount of across-the-board success for science and society, is that one endeavour without an additional source of funding for it would come along and suck up so much funding that it would unbalance the portfolio."
In his Big Think column, Siegel writes that while a nuclear reactor on the Moon isn't in itself a bad idea – as prolonged periods of darkness on the Moon mean future lunar settlers couldn't rely completely on solar power – the speed at which NASA is pursuing the project is unviable.
A Moon for everyone?
Other critics of NASA's plan to put a nuclear reactor on the lunar surface point to the United Nations' Outer Space Treaty, which was signed by Russia, the UK and the USA in 1967.
It states "the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind," and "outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means."
Some argue that the need to ring-fence a nuclear reactor on the Moon under one country's jurisdiction would contravene some key tenets of the treaty.
A key moment for crewed spaceflight?
The US Department of Energy, however, says that plans to build a nuclear reactor on the Moon are necessary for future human spaceflight.
NASA says "Fission surface power can provide abundant and continuous power regardless of environmental conditions on the Moon and Mars."
The agency also points to the "limitations of solar power systems on the Moon," given that lunar nights last about 14 Earth days.
And, NASA says, a nuclear reactor could even be placed in permanently shadowed areas on the Moon, providing power in the same regions where vital water ice can be found.
US Secretary of Energy Chris Wright says: "History shows that when American science and innovation come together, from the Manhattan Project to the Apollo Mission, our nation leads the world to reach new frontiers once thought impossible.
"This agreement continues that legacy. Thanks to President Trump’s leadership and his America First Space Policy, the department is proud to work with NASA and the commercial space industry on what will be one of the greatest technical achievements in the history of nuclear energy and space exploration."
Should NASA and the US build a nuclear reactor on the Moon? Is it necessary for the continuation of human spaceflight? Let us know your thoughts by emailing contactus@skyatnightmagazine.com
