Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
6 min of reading 
0 comments 
The Power Struggle in Space Has Entered a New Chapter. The United States, China, and Russia Are Preparing to Install the First Nuclear Reactor on the Moon, in a Race That Could Determine Who Will Control Strategic Areas on the Satellite in the Coming Decades.
During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union fought an intense battle to see who would get to the Moon first. The Americans triumphed in 1969, but now a new and even more ambitious space race is underway.
This time, the goal is not just to set foot on the satellite, but to install the first nuclear reactor on its surface.
Plans of the United States
This week, it came to light that Sean Duffy, the new head of NASA, aims to place an American nuclear reactor on the Moon before 2030.
-
With R$ 189 million and 10 Brazilian companies, Brazil is developing a 12-meter national rocket to launch satellites of up to 30 kg from Alcântara and try to conquer the “key to space” without depending on powers like the USA, Russia, China, and India.
-
Mangroves hide a billion-dollar water cleanup, remove 960 thousand tons of nitrogen per year, and reveal an environmental power that many people hadn’t even imagined existed.
-
Researchers found evidence that the human brain can react to the Earth’s magnetic field, according to a study published in the journal eNeuro. The participants remained in a sealed chamber and didn’t even notice when the magnetic field was altered.
-
Sweden resumes in Luleå the largest dredging of its modern era and will remove 22 million cubic meters to take the port beyond its 50,000-ton limit, make way for 160,000-ton ships, and unlock the ore route in the Baltic Sea.
According to a directive obtained by the website Politico, this installation would allow the U.S. to declare an “exclusion zone” at the chosen site.
This measure would serve to protect the landing area for the future American lunar base, planned as part of the Artemis Program.
The project envisions a reactor capable of generating at least 100 kilowatts, enough energy to power 80 average homes in the U.S.
This supply would be the foundation for maintaining a permanent presence on the satellite. Initially, NASA planned a 40-kilowatt reactor for the same timeframe, but it is unclear whether it will proceed with the previous design.
Mr. Duffy has mandated that, within 30 days, NASA appoint a project manager and, within 60 days, open bidding for interested companies. The urgency is justified: whoever arrives first could impose their own operating rules.
International Competition
The U.S. is not the only one eyeing nuclear energy on the Moon. In May, China and Russia signed an agreement to build their own reactor, targeting 2036 as the final deadline.
The structure will power the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS), planned to operate about 100 km from the Moon’s South Pole. The project will include 17 partner countries, including Egypt, Pakistan, Venezuela, Thailand, and South Africa.
According to Roscosmos, the Russian space agency, the station will conduct fundamental research and test technologies for long-term operations, with a view towards human presence.
The first step will be taken by the Chinese mission Chang’e-8, which will mark China’s first attempt at a human landing on the satellite.
Why Nuclear Energy
The most important thing to understand is that the Moon faces periods of two weeks of darkness and extreme cold every month.
At the South Pole, which is of interest to NASA, the Sun barely rises on the horizon, and there are craters in permanent shadow. This makes it unfeasible to rely solely on solar energy and batteries to keep bases and vehicles operational.
Nuclear energy thus becomes essential to sustain continuous operations.
It would ensure autonomy even in the most extreme phases, allowing for experiments, equipment maintenance, and human survival without reliance on the solar cycle.
American Strategy and Risks
Mr. Duffy was clear in warning that the first country to install a nuclear reactor could declare an exclusion zone. This would prevent others from approaching, which is seen as a threat to the Artemis Program if China or Russia arrives first.
These “safety zones” were included in the Artemis Accords, signed by the U.S. in 2020. Although the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 prohibits territorial claims in space, the accords establish that an area used by one country can be isolated to protect operations.
Officially, this exclusivity ends when the activity is over. In practice, however, for a permanent base, this would function like a border.
According to Dr. Jill Stuart, a space law expert from the London School of Economics, this rule creates an advantage for whoever arrives first. The initial installation ensures control over the area, even without formal ownership, limiting access for others.
Strategic Value of the Moon
For experts like Dr. Mark Hilborne from King’s College London, the Moon will have points that are more valuable than others. Regions near the South Pole, for example, concentrate resources and ideal conditions for bases. Furthermore, the satellite is viewed as a staging platform for future space missions. If structures and fuels can be produced there, costs will drop dramatically compared to sending from Earth.
This strategic importance fuels the current competition.
Whoever establishes infrastructure first not only secures scientific and economic advantages but also may dictate the rules of use.
Change of Priorities in the U.S.
The American movement also stands out against the internal context. Despite cuts to scientific missions and the smallest NASA budget since 1961, over US$ 7 billion have been allocated for lunar exploration.
The Artemis Program, which was threatened with cancellation during Donald Trump’s administration, now aims to return humans to the Moon by 2027.
The new focus makes it clear that Washington sees human exploration as a priority, even in the face of budget constraints.
The pressure to act quickly reinforces the perception that there is urgency in securing a presence on the satellite before rivals advance.
Rules and Diplomatic Tensions
The competition is complex because neither China nor Russia has signed the Artemis Accords. This means that, legally, they do not have to respect exclusion zones defined by the U.S.
Dr. Fabio Tronchetti, a space law expert at Northumbria University, states that international law does not recognize these claims and sees the American initiative as an attempt to impose rules favorable to its own interests.
This legal gap increases the risk of confrontations, as each nation can interpret the norms in its own way. The absence of a solid international consensus on how to divide and protect areas on the Moon leaves room for direct disputes.
The Potential for Conflicts
The scenario outlined by experts indicates that the race for a nuclear reactor on the Moon is not just a technological issue. It involves geopolitical and legal interests that can spill over into military and diplomatic tensions.
The establishment of a base with energy autonomy would be a landmark but also a trigger for disputes over sovereignty and control.
The very notion of an “exclusion zone” contrasts with the spirit of the Outer Space Treaty. However, for the countries involved, ensuring access and security for their installations seems to be an absolute priority.
The Future of the Race
Although it is still unknown which country will arrive first, it is evident that the next decade will be decisive. The U.S. wants a functioning nuclear reactor by the end of the decade.
China and Russia plan to complete theirs by 2036. In the midst of this competition, other nations align themselves with one block or another, shaping a scenario that recalls the logic of the Cold War but now focused on space.
Regardless of the outcome, the Moon will become the stage for permanent operations, and possibly enduring rivalries.
The technological advancements needed to operate nuclear reactors in such a hostile environment could also influence other sectors, but the immediate goal is clear: to secure presence and influence before the competitor does the same.
Thus, the current race is not merely for science or exploration. It is a struggle for power, functional territory, and the right to dictate rules in one of the most strategic places beyond Earth. And, as experts warn, this dispute is just beginning.
-
1 person reacted to this.