Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
4 min of reading 
0 comments 
China Turns The Moon Race Upside Down! Chinese Scientists Found Critical Flaws In NASA’s Nuclear Reactor That Could Compromise U.S. Plans To Inhabit The Moon.
The space race is heating up again. The competition to build the first lunar base is underway, and this time, China is gaining ground.
Although the United States triumphed in the previous race to the Moon against the Soviet Union, the current landscape is quite different.
NASA, which is leading efforts to inhabit the Moon, is facing a new challenge from China.
Chinese scientists discovered flaws in a crucial element of the U.S. lunar program: the power source.
-
“Whatever Russia is testing, it is sophisticated”: The quote is from the American COMSPOC, which observed two Russian military satellites maneuvering to within less than 3 meters of each other in low orbit last week.
-
Scientists discovered purely by chance that a microscopic organism taken from a pond in Oxford does not follow one of the “universal” rules of DNA, a finding made during a sequencing test with a very different objective.
-
After 30 years of development, engineer presents flying car that turns into a ‘plane’ in less than 2 minutes, uses a 280 hp engine, has already logged over 170 flight hours, and is coming to market
-
Scientists create a ‘Google Earth’ of the human body, scanning entire organs in 3D with synchrotron X-rays and allowing zooming in to cellular structures without cutting the tissue.
NASA’s Lunar Reactor
Through the Artemis Agreement, NASA is at the forefront of the space race with its partners, aiming to create a permanent base on the Moon.
On the other hand, China, along with Russia and some allies, is moving forward with the development of the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS).
This station, which is set to start operating in 2036, is expected to be home to thousands of scientists.
On the Moon, the situation is a bit different. A lunar night lasts 14 Earth days, which means solar energy will not be sufficient to ensure a reliable power supply.
To address this, NASA developed a small nuclear reactor, the Fission Surface Power (FSP), designed to operate in extreme conditions on the lunar surface.
This fission reactor was created to generate 40 kW of power, but the solution provided by NASA is not perfect.
China Finds Flaws In NASA’s Design
Researchers from the China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) analyzed NASA’s design and identified critical flaws.
A study published in the journal Atomic Energy Science and Technology exposed these vulnerabilities, focusing on the composition of the nuclear fuel, the cooling system, and the safety controls of the American reactor.
Although the FSP reactor is compact and efficient, Chinese scientists warn of a major design flaw.
The use of cylindrical rods of highly enriched uranium requires thick layers of beryllium as protection.
This can control intense radiation, but it also limits the reactor’s lifespan to about eight years due to fuel swelling caused by radiation.
Furthermore, NASA’s reactor has a simple control mechanism, making it less safe in critical situations.
It was in this context that Chinese scientists began working on an enhanced version of the lunar reactor.
The Chinese Lunar Nuclear Reactor
Based on NASA’s design and an old Soviet reactor, the TOPAZ-II, Chinese scientists presented a superior design.
This new version, more efficient and safer, features several improvements over NASA’s reactor.
Ring-Shaped Fuel Rods
Instead of using solid cylinders, the Chinese reactor employs ring-shaped fuel rods.
Inside these rings, small pellets of uranium dioxide are covered with stainless steel.
This innovative design allows the heat generated by the nuclear reaction to dissipate more efficiently, using both the interior and exterior of the ring for cooling.
Dual Cooling System
Another significant advancement of the Chinese reactor is its cooling system, which uses a liquid metal called NaK-78.
This metal flows through the internal and external channels of the annular fuel rods, keeping the reactor’s temperature below 600°C.
This significantly enhances the safety and stability of the reactor.
More Efficient Neutron Moderator
Additionally, the Chinese design uses a more efficient neutron moderator: yttrium hydride (YH1.8).
This material, responsible for slowing down neutrons, improves the nuclear reaction and makes the process more efficient.
Compared to traditional moderators, like zirconium hydride, yttrium hydride is more stable, preventing dangerous hydrogen leakage and increasing the reactor’s lifespan.
Less Nuclear Fuel Required
The design of the Chinese reactor also has an important advantage: it requires less nuclear fuel.
While NASA’s reactor needs about 70 kg of uranium-235, the Chinese reactor uses only 18.5 kg of the material.
This weight reduction is not just a cost-saving measure but also a necessity in space missions, as nuclear materials must be launched from Earth.
The Chinese Advantage In The Lunar Race
With these improvements, the Chinese reactor becomes up to 75% more efficient than NASA’s model.
Moreover, its lifespan reaches 10 years, while NASA’s reactor has a limited lifespan of eight years.
These improvements could put China ahead of the United States in the goal of establishing a sustainable lunar presence.
The constant energy provided by a nuclear reactor will be essential to sustain inhabited bases on the Moon for a long period of time.
What Can The U.S. Do Now?
Although the Chinese reactor is more efficient, NASA’s design is not definitive or closed.
Just as China learned from NASA’s design, the U.S. can benefit from Chinese research to enhance its own lunar reactor.
Moreover, this collaboration in space research could influence the development of small modular reactors (SMRs) for use on Earth.
It’s interesting how space innovations often result in technologies that end up being applied in other sectors.
Do You Think China Can Overtake The United States In The Space Race, Or Can NASA’s Project Be Enhanced To Achieve Leadership In Lunar Exploration?
-
1 person reacted to this.