What better way to relax you into the weekend than with a quick update on moon nukes.
We’re talking reactors rather than weapons, and there’s a joke in there about the nuclear industry finally getting so tired of earthly NIMBYs it had to relocate to the Moon.
But seriously the US is rushing plans to build a reactor on the Moon by 2030.
Stay on top of your world from inside your inbox.
Subscribe for free today and receive way much more insights.
Trusted by 138,000+ subscribers
No spam. No noise. Unsubscribe any time.
Why? The idea is to provide a continuous and reliable source of power up where nights last two weeks.
Why? To sustain more lunar habitats, research, and manufacturing.
Why? It reduces our reliance on shipping everything from Earth, providing a critical stepping stone to Mars and beyond.
Why? This is entering toddler territory, and getting metaphysical, but human-kind won’t (and can’t) ever stop exploring our universe. It’s who we are.
So the Moon reactor dream has been around for decades, and NASA was ninja-starring $5M design contracts out into the private sector as recently as 2022.
So then why the fuss now?
Just in April, China (with Russia) announced lunar reactor plans by the mid 2030s. And there’s nothing like two rivals doing a thing to make you suddenly need it too.
While the 1967 Outer Space Treaty says no country can own the Moon, the 2020 US-led Artemis Accords potentially allow signatories to set up “safety zones” around their gear. And while China and Russia oppose those accords, they’re charging ahead with their own International Lunar Research Station partnership anyway.
That’s why NASA’s acting boss and former lumberjack, Sean Duffy, spelled out the risks, noting Beijing and Moscow could “declare a keep-out zone” if they get there first.
Still, there are some lingering questions.
First, is this even possible? Yes! Folks are already adapting lightweight, modular reactors for lunar conditions (vacuum, dust, wild temperatures). The trickier hurdle for NASA’s Artemis program seems to have been launching radioactive material into orbit.
Second, is it legal? Yes! The UN already has Principles Relevant to the Use of Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space (1992), setting out safety and liability rules. Not only did China and Russia get onboard, but so did everyone else via a UN vote.
Third, am I having deja-vu… again? The space race dominated the 20th century, with both Americans and Soviets seeing a man on the Moon as a proxy for political prestige, ideological superiority, and technological supremacy. And while Cold War analogies are flawed (eg, US-Soviet ties weren’t co-dependent like US-China ties), this feels like a re-do.
Intrigue’s Take
So what might we learn about our world from this fresh Friday moon nuclear update?
- First, it’s a reminder of the geopolitics of infrastructure. Whether it’s 19th century railroads, 20th century data cables, or 21st century moon reactors, whoever builds first can set the rules then enjoy a geopolitical dividend that lasts centuries.
- Second, diplomacy has a long tail, too. Some of the rules shaping this space race redux were penned back when TV was still in black-and-white. And…
- Third, today’s race is forcing tougher choices you can see in DC: while the White House and Congress haggle over the extent to which NASA should eat cost-cuts, President Trump just signed an executive order some hope will render the DC budget debate irrelevant (unleashing more US private sector participation).
