NASA and its rivals race to the Moon without liability rules
By Tom Beckwith · Reporting from Washington ·
As powers rush to build lunar bases that survive the 14-day night, the space race deploys nuclear reactors with no liability rules to manage the risks.
Interests first, capabilities second, statements last
The cold physics of the lunar night dictate that solar power and batteries are insufficient for permanent habitation. As reported in Universe Today, lunar nights last approximately 14 days with temperatures dropping to -223°C, rendering unassisted solar arrays useless. Shipping supplies from Earth costs tens of thousands of dollars per kilogram. In-situ resource utilization is required for long-term lunar bases. Molten Salt Electrolysis extracts oxygen and metallic alloys from lunar regolith but requires temperatures above 900°C. Traditional electric heaters for these processes lose energy as waste heat, making high-temperature nuclear microreactors an absolute necessity rather than a luxury.
To secure this capability, the United States, China, and Russia are locked in a race for surface energy dominance. As Aerospace America notes through Zeno Power CEO Tyler Bernstein, nations see increased competition in the Arctic seabed and deep space. In these domains, energy supply is a massive challenge. NASA and the U.S. Energy Department announced study contracts for lunar nuclear reactors. Their goal is generating power on the surface for at least a decade. A White House memorandum targets reactors on the Moon by 2030. NASA also plans a fission surface power system of at least 100 kW. Meanwhile, China and Russia have a joint plan to place a reactor on the Moon by the mid-2030s for the International Lunar Research Station.
The technical approaches vary wildly in capability. Julius Mercz of the Technical University of Munich and co-authors published a paper on arXiv describing the Microreactor Utilisation for Lunar Exploration. The system uses an all-ceramic core made primarily of silicon carbide. The reactor features fuel assemblies loaded with TRISO particles enriched to 93% U-235, capable of operating for 95 years without refueling. Conversely, commercial entities like Zeno Power produce nuclear batteries rather than fission reactors. They use Americium-241 recovered from nuclear waste streams to power radioisotope heater units and Stirling generators.
The shadow of SNAP-10A and the cost of silence
Pursuing high-power orbital infrastructure to enable capabilities that solar power cannot sustain carries unpriced risks. This dynamic mirrors Project SNAP-10A, the U.S. experimental nuclear-powered satellite launched in 1965 under the SNAPSHOT program. That test marked the world's first operation of a nuclear reactor in orbit. The reactor stopped working after just 43 days due to a non-nuclear electrical component failure. SNAP-10A exposed the fragility of early space nuclear engineering. Today's rush to deploy enriched fission cores on the lunar surface treats containment and liability as afterthoughts.
The regulatory architecture governing these deployments is alarmingly thin. The Outer Space Treaty of 1967 bans nuclear weapons in orbit or on celestial bodies. The Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects establishes absolute liability for damage on Earth. Yet as noted by The Indian Express, UN principles apply only to non-propulsive power sources. The safety framework remains non-binding. When the Soviet satellite Cosmos 954 re-entered over northern Canada in 1978, it scattered radioactive debris. A catastrophic reactor failure during a lunar operation leaves capitals with no updated legal framework to manage the fallout.
Statements and the five-year price tag
Statements from capitals currently emphasize urgency, decarbonization, and energy resiliency, masking the hard five-year cost of untethered escalation. As reported in Aerospace America, Zeno Power CEO Tyler Bernstein stated that nuclear has come back at full thrust right now. Yet Zeno has secured significant backing through Department of Defense contracts, including Award FA945322CA019 for $14,997,862.62. Military and intelligence interests are quietly underwriting space nuclear power long before international safety norms are codified.
The five-year cost of this uncoordinated race will be measured in diplomatic friction and technical miscalculation. Researchers acknowledge that current lunar excavating technology is insufficient to dig a hole large enough to bury the reactor. This leaves early surface designs dangerously exposed. When space nuclear systems are deployed to score geopolitical points, every technical glitch risks becoming an international crisis.
Nations are rushing to seed the lunar south pole with atomic heat sources. Meanwhile, they treat international liability as a problem for the next treaty cycle. NASA targets 2030 while China and Russia plan for the mid-2030s. Without binding safety frameworks, the Moon will become an armed nuclear camp. It will be governed by the law of the jungle.