Be respectful in your interactions with fellow members. You can Go Here to read our Terms and Rules. Visit My Profile to create your avatar and see your posts. If you to report a bug or issue, email us at support.GI US.com

Title: August 10, 2025

GRAY ZONE BRIEF 10 AUGUST 2025

GZB INFOCUS:

The Space Race To Build a Nuclear Reactor On The Moon

Earlier this week, NASA Administrator Sean Duffy revealed an ambitious goal: He wants the U.S. to build a nuclear reactor on the Moon by 2030. He described it as a way to one-up China, which had outlined plans to construct a lunar nuclear reactor by 2035.

But what purpose would the reactor serve? And is putting one on the Moon even legal?

Michelle L.D. Hanlon, a space lawyer at the University of Mississippi, explains how a decades-old United Nations resolution gives countries the green light to build one on the Moon. In fact, NASA has been working on the science of constructing a lunar reactor with the Department of Energy for years, so the idea isn’t new. But it isn’t just about having a power source for a lunar base. Being the first to break ground is a big deal.

Space law – much of which originates from a 1967 U.N. treaty – can be a little fuzzy. Technically, nobody can make a territorial claim on the Moon. However, countries do have to give each other some personal space. Putting up a permanent structure like a nuclear reactor would effectively give its owner clear, legally defensible access to that area. On the Moon, where the prime spots to build a lunar base are all concentrated in one region, this is huge.

As Hanlon puts it: “The future of the Moon won’t be determined by who plants the most flags. It will be determined by who builds what, and how. Nuclear power may be essential for that future.”

Nuclear reactors in space may sound like something out of science fiction, but they are likely to prove important for powering long-term space missions.

In April 2025, China reportedly unveiled plans to build a nuclear power plant on the Moon by 2035. This plant would support its planned international lunar research station in August, when acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy reportedly suggested a U.S. reactor would be operational on the Moon by 2030.

While it might feel like a sudden sprint, this isn’t exactly breaking news. NASA and the Department of Energy have spent years quietly developing small nuclear power systems (https://www.nasa.gov/space-technology-mission-directorate/tdm/fission-surface-power/) to power lunar bases, mining operations and long-term habitats.

As a space lawyer (https://law.olemiss.edu/faculty-directory/michelle-hanlon/) focused on long-term human advancement into space, I see this not as an arms race but as a strategic infrastructure race. And in this case, infrastructure is influence.

A lunar nuclear reactor may sound dramatic, but its neither illegal nor unprecedented. If deployed responsibly, it could allow countries to peacefully explore the Moon, fuel their economic growth and test out technologies for deeper space missions. But building a reactor also raises critical questions about access and power.

The legal framework already exists

Nuclear power in isn’t a new idea. Since the 1960s, the U.S. and the Soviet Union have relied on radioisotope generators that use small amounts of radioactive elements – a type of nuclear fuel – to power satellites, Mars rovers and the Voyager probes.

The United Nations’ 1992 Principles Relevant to the Use of Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space (https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/47/68), a nonbinding resolution, recognizes that nuclear energy may be essential for missions where solar power is insufficient. This resolution sets guidelines for safety, transparency and international consultation.

Nothing in international law prohibits the peaceful use of nuclear power on the Moon. But what matters is how countries deploy it. And the first country to succeed could shape the norms for expectations, behaviors and legal interpretations related to lunar presence and influence.

Why being first matters:

The 1967 Outer Space Treaty (https://www.unoosa.org/pdf/gares/ARES_21_2222E.pdf), ratified by all major spacefaring nations including the U.S., China and Russia, governs space activity requires that states act with “due regard to the corresponding interests of all other States Parties.”

That statement means if one country places a nuclear reactor on the Moon, others must navigate it legally and physically.

In effect, it draws a line on the lunar map. If the reactor anchors a larger, long-term facility, it could quietly shape what countries do and how their moves are interpreted legally, on the Moon and beyond.

Other articles in the Outer Space Treaty set similar boundaries on behavior, even as they encourage cooperation. They affirm that all countries have the right to freely explore and access the Moon and other celestial bodies, but they explicitly prohibit ownership or assertions of sovereignty.

At the same time, the treaty acknowledges that countries may establish installations such as bases — and with that, gain the power to limit access. While visits by other countries are encouraged as a transparency measure, they must be preceded by prior consultations. Effectively, this grants operators a degree of control over who can enter and when.

Building infrastructure is not staking a territorial claim. No one can own the Moon, but one country setting up a reactor could shape where and how others operate – functionally, if not legally.

Infrastructure is influence

Building a nuclear reactor establishes a country’s presence in a given area. This idea is especially important for resource-rich areas such as the lunar south pole, where ice found in perpetually shadowed craters could fuel rockets and sustain lunar bases.

These sought-after regions are scientifically vital and geopolitically sensitive, as multiple countries want to build bases or conduct research there. Building infrastructure in these areas would cement a country’s ability to access the resources there and potentially exclude others from doing the same.

Critics may worry about radiation risks. Even if designed for peaceful use and contained properly, reactors introduce new environmental and operational hazards, particularly in a dangerous setting such as space. But the U.N. guidelines do outline rigorous safety protocols, and following them could potentially mitigate these concerns.

Why nuclear? Because solar has limits

The Moon has little atmosphere (https://science.nasa.gov/moon/lunar-atmosphere/) and experiences 14-day stretches of darkness (https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/space-science/how-long-day-on-the-moon). In some shadowed craters, where ice is likely to be found, sunlight never reaches the surface at all. These issues make solar energy unreliable, if not impossible, in some of the most critical regions.

A small lunar reactor (https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/what-are-small-modular-reactors-smrs) could operate continuously for a decade or more, powering habitats, rovers, 3D printers and life-support systems. Nuclear power could be the linchpin for long-term human activity. And it’s not just about the Moon – developing this capability is essential for missions to Mars, where solar power is even more constrained.

A call for governance, not alarm

The United States has an opportunity to lead not just in technology but in governance. If it commits to sharing its plans publicly, following Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty and reaffirming a commitment to peaceful use and international participation, it will encourage other countries to do the same.

The future of the Moon won’t be determined by who plants the most flags. It will be determined by who builds what, and how. Nuclear power may be essential for that future. Building transparently and in line with international guidelines would allow countries to more safely realize that future.

A reactor on the Moon isn’t a territorial claim or a declaration of war. But it is infrastructure. And infrastructure will be how countries display power – of all kinds – in the next era of space exploration.

Helium 3

What has China been up to on the dark side of the Moon? Helium 3. Materials on the Moon's surface contain helium-3 at concentrations between 1.4 and 15 ppb in sunlit areas, and may contain concentrations as much as 50 ppb in permanently shadowed regions.

Neutron detection

Helium-3 is an important isotope in instrumentation for neutron detection. It has a high absorption cross section for thermal neutron beams and is used as a converter gas in neutron detectors. The neutron is converted through the nuclear reaction

n + 3He → 3H + 1H + 0.764 MeV

into charged particles tritium ions (T, 3H) and Hydrogen ions or protons (p, 1H) which then are detected by creating a charge cloud in the stopping gas of a proportional counter or a Geiger–Müller tube.

Furthermore, the absorption process is strongly spin helium-3 volume to transmit neutrons with one spin component while absorbing the other. This effect is employed in neutron polarization analysis, a technique which probes for magnetic properties SHTF mof matter.

The United States Department of Homeland Security had hoped to deploy detectors to spot smuggled plutonium in shipping containers by their neutron emissions, but the worldwide shortage of helium-3 following the drawdown in nuclear weapons production since the Cold War has to some extent prevented this. As of 2012, DHS determined the commercial supply of boron-10 would support converting its neutron detection infrastructure to that technology.

Cryogenics

Helium-3 refrigerators are devices used in experimental physics for obtaining temperatures down to about 0.2 kelvin. By evaporative cooling of helium-4, a 1-K pot liquefies a small amount of helium-3 in a small vessel called a helium-3 pot.

Evaporative cooling at low pressure of the liquid helium-3, usually driven by adsorption since due to its high price the helium-3 is usually contained in a closed system to avoid losses, cools the helium-3 pot to a fraction of a kelvin.

A dilution refrigerator uses a mixture of helium-3 and helium-4 to reach cryogenic temperatures as low as a few thousandths of a kelvin.

Why It Matters:

Helium 3 is the super coolant needed to stop Quantum Computers from overheating.

If China wins the race to build this technology — the applications and consequences of that — could potentially end the United States. Read that again.

Pray.

Train.

Stay informed.

Build resilient communities.

—END REPORT