This reads to be just another way to divert billions of dollars from Department of Energy and Department of Defense into the private pockets of the clowns running SMR startups.
Because ain’t no way they’re going to have a design ready to land on the moon by 2030. Especially given the current nuclear bro clowns who are already bilking us the taxpayers out of billions of dollars for their nonexistent SMR proposals.
shopkins402 on
Can’t wait for the moment when a complicated divorced couple saves it from meltdown while wrapped in only duct tape.
Astrogod07 on
Would this really be more effective than solar and batteries?
EDIT: good points made about batteries, I didn’t think about the two week lunar days and nights.
Cut the science budget? Cause that’s what they’re trying to do.
MobileNerd on
I’m sure it will some derivative of an RTG or multiple RTG’s to supply power. As a former reactor operator I would imagine it will be several reactors as a form of redundancy much like how our modern carrier have two reactors. I would imagine there would be a combination of solar, batteries and reactor array.
Decronym on
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|——-|———|—|
|[ECLSS](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogj941r “Last usage”)|Environment Control and Life Support System|
|[H2](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/oggcr1v “Last usage”)|Molecular hydrogen|
| |Second half of the year/month|
|[HLS](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/oggcr1v “Last usage”)|[Human Landing System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#Human_Landing_System) (Artemis)|
|[LEO](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogjcr2y “Last usage”)|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)|
|[LOX](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/oggcr1v “Last usage”)|Liquid Oxygen|
|[RTG](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogjcr2y “Last usage”)|Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator|
|[SLS](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogjcr2y “Last usage”)|Space Launch System heavy-lift|
|Jargon|Definition|
|——-|———|—|
|[cryogenic](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogdc1d8 “Last usage”)|Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure|
| |(In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox|
|[electrolysis](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogdihid “Last usage”)|Application of DC current to separate a solution into its constituents (for example, water to hydrogen and oxygen)|
|hydrolox|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer|
Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
By continuing to try and cut their budget? Interesting tactic…
ttubehtnitahwtahw1 on
Earth base needs nuclear power. Idk these people are so afraid and adverse to it.
BareNakedSole on
I would think solar panels on the atmosphere-less moon would be a good idea……..?
Drizznarte on
Just get Rolls Royce to repurpose one for a submarine. Sorted.
OldWrangler9033 on
Getting it by cutting budget other things to fund it?
Heroshrine on
To everyone asking how the cooling works, I’d also like to know, but didn’t we already have some small reactors on some spacecraft? IIR its the only place we actually turn the nuclear radiation directly into energy instead of just boiling water.
ICLazeru on
Do they really though? Seems like if the base is at the north or south pole of the moon, you could set up slightly elevated solar panels that could track the sun nearly 24/7. Maybe only going dark a few hours during lunar eclipses.
This would provide nearly constant power and only require a few hours of backup capacity for the times when it is out.
Nerdenator on
Could they not just ask the guys who make them for the Navy to give it a try?
Seriously, I don’t know much about nuclear reactors.
mregister on
Are they not worried about the Moon Bears?
asoupconofsoup on
We are just going to travel the galaxy polluting and ruining every planet we can find aren’t we…
Mijder on
I don’t trust this White House with anything nuclear.
dibendurklis on
Just yesterday I listened to investment podcast where main guests was trying to develop nuclear small scale reactors just for this case. It’s in my native language so can’t really drop a link.
GerardHard on
Why only 20kW? The ISS’s main solar arrays alone produce atleast 80kW. What type of reactor are they using?
Triedfindingname on
Yeah BS the whitehouse doesnt plan.
Small_Dog_8699 on
The White House isn’t capable of making a workable plan. Leave it to engineers.
ARobertNotABob on
Does reduced/zero gravity have any influence on a fusion reactor?
JeffCarr on
Wow, this is horrible journalism. The timeline isn’t slightly plausible, the 2028 plan, and I use that word loosely is for an orbiting reactor which does nothing for any imaginary moon base, and we have no moon base and no lander.
How would we even get it there? SLS is fully committed to crew launches even if it isn’t cancelled after the next flight to LEO as proposed in the budget, and Starship and Blue Moon arent launching nuclear material any time soon, historically RTGs have required more proven vehicles with dozens of successful flights, more than they could possibly have by that time, and this is much more dangerous.
If all the systems were built and ready today fueled and waiting to launch, it wouldn’t be approved for at least 5 years. What happened to Scientific American? This is comically bad journalism.
Edit: I went back to the source material, and it changes my critique. The plan released was to get the first reactor prototype ready by 2030, second by 2031, and the next in the 2030s. It says nothing about actually launching it. 2028 was never mentioned at all, and there is no plan here to do anything but prepare the reactors.
It makes the plan actually plausible, but I’m unsure if that makes the article better or worse.
29 Comments
Developing nuclear plants for space is a great idea. 20kW though seems *really* little.
How does the cooling work?
The White House does science???
Yeeeaahhh why don’t we just put a short pause on any complicated plans until the current administration goes away.
How do you cool it down in space ?
Non-paywalled version: [https://archive.is/wvTmO](https://archive.is/wvTmO)
Read the document.
This reads to be just another way to divert billions of dollars from Department of Energy and Department of Defense into the private pockets of the clowns running SMR startups.
Because ain’t no way they’re going to have a design ready to land on the moon by 2030. Especially given the current nuclear bro clowns who are already bilking us the taxpayers out of billions of dollars for their nonexistent SMR proposals.
Can’t wait for the moment when a complicated divorced couple saves it from meltdown while wrapped in only duct tape.
Would this really be more effective than solar and batteries?
EDIT: good points made about batteries, I didn’t think about the two week lunar days and nights.
https://vote.gov/
Cut the science budget? Cause that’s what they’re trying to do.
I’m sure it will some derivative of an RTG or multiple RTG’s to supply power. As a former reactor operator I would imagine it will be several reactors as a form of redundancy much like how our modern carrier have two reactors. I would imagine there would be a combination of solar, batteries and reactor array.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|——-|———|—|
|[ECLSS](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogj941r “Last usage”)|Environment Control and Life Support System|
|[H2](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/oggcr1v “Last usage”)|Molecular hydrogen|
| |Second half of the year/month|
|[HLS](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/oggcr1v “Last usage”)|[Human Landing System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#Human_Landing_System) (Artemis)|
|[LEO](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogjcr2y “Last usage”)|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)|
|[LOX](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/oggcr1v “Last usage”)|Liquid Oxygen|
|[RTG](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogjcr2y “Last usage”)|Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator|
|[SLS](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogjcr2y “Last usage”)|Space Launch System heavy-lift|
|Jargon|Definition|
|——-|———|—|
|[cryogenic](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogdc1d8 “Last usage”)|Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure|
| |(In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox|
|[electrolysis](/r/Space/comments/1smb6cw/stub/ogdihid “Last usage”)|Application of DC current to separate a solution into its constituents (for example, water to hydrogen and oxygen)|
|hydrolox|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer|
Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
—————-
^(9 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/Space/comments/1slgvuo)^( has 24 acronyms.)
^([Thread #12338 for this sub, first seen 15th Apr 2026, 18:00])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
By continuing to try and cut their budget? Interesting tactic…
Earth base needs nuclear power. Idk these people are so afraid and adverse to it.
I would think solar panels on the atmosphere-less moon would be a good idea……..?
Just get Rolls Royce to repurpose one for a submarine. Sorted.
Getting it by cutting budget other things to fund it?
To everyone asking how the cooling works, I’d also like to know, but didn’t we already have some small reactors on some spacecraft? IIR its the only place we actually turn the nuclear radiation directly into energy instead of just boiling water.
Do they really though? Seems like if the base is at the north or south pole of the moon, you could set up slightly elevated solar panels that could track the sun nearly 24/7. Maybe only going dark a few hours during lunar eclipses.
This would provide nearly constant power and only require a few hours of backup capacity for the times when it is out.
Could they not just ask the guys who make them for the Navy to give it a try?
Seriously, I don’t know much about nuclear reactors.
Are they not worried about the Moon Bears?
We are just going to travel the galaxy polluting and ruining every planet we can find aren’t we…
I don’t trust this White House with anything nuclear.
Just yesterday I listened to investment podcast where main guests was trying to develop nuclear small scale reactors just for this case. It’s in my native language so can’t really drop a link.
Why only 20kW? The ISS’s main solar arrays alone produce atleast 80kW. What type of reactor are they using?
Yeah BS the whitehouse doesnt plan.
The White House isn’t capable of making a workable plan. Leave it to engineers.
Does reduced/zero gravity have any influence on a fusion reactor?
Wow, this is horrible journalism. The timeline isn’t slightly plausible, the 2028 plan, and I use that word loosely is for an orbiting reactor which does nothing for any imaginary moon base, and we have no moon base and no lander.
How would we even get it there? SLS is fully committed to crew launches even if it isn’t cancelled after the next flight to LEO as proposed in the budget, and Starship and Blue Moon arent launching nuclear material any time soon, historically RTGs have required more proven vehicles with dozens of successful flights, more than they could possibly have by that time, and this is much more dangerous.
If all the systems were built and ready today fueled and waiting to launch, it wouldn’t be approved for at least 5 years. What happened to Scientific American? This is comically bad journalism.
Edit: I went back to the source material, and it changes my critique. The plan released was to get the first reactor prototype ready by 2030, second by 2031, and the next in the 2030s. It says nothing about actually launching it. 2028 was never mentioned at all, and there is no plan here to do anything but prepare the reactors.
It makes the plan actually plausible, but I’m unsure if that makes the article better or worse.