NASA's Fired Up About a Nuclear Reactor on the Moon

Placing an atomic energy source on the moon is 'not science fiction,' experts say

- KENNETH CHANG

NUCLEAR REACTORS HAVE been generating power on Earth for more than 70 years. How hard would it be to place one on the moon to provide copious, continuous energy through the cold, dark, two-week-long lunar nights? And could that be accomplished in less than five years?

Sean Duffy, the secretary of transportation who is now also NASA's acting administrator, called for just that last week: a reactor producing at least 100 kilowatts of electricity — enough to power about 80 households in the US — that would launch to the moon before 2030.

Why put a nuclear reactor?

Nuclear reactor technology would transform the ability of humanity to travel and live in the solar system. Many of NASA's robotic spacecraft today operate at power levels equivalent to what a few incandescent lightbulbs consume. That limits what scientific instruments can be put on board.