NASA Announces Artemis Concept Awards for Nuclear Power on Moon
WASHINGTON (NASA PR) — NASA and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) are working together to advance space nuclear technologies. The agencies have selected three design concept proposals for a fission surface power system design that could be ready to launch by the end of the decade for a demonstration on the Moon. This technology would benefit future exploration under the Artemis umbrella.
The contracts, to be awarded through the DOE’s Idaho National Laboratory, are each valued at approximately $5 million. The contracts fund the development of initial design concepts for a 40-kilowatt class fission power system planned to last at least 10 years in the lunar environment.
Relatively small and lightweight compared to other power systems, fission systems are reliable and could enable continuous power regardless of location, available sunlight, and other natural environmental conditions. A demonstration of such systems on the Moon would pave the way for long-duration missions on the Moon and Mars.
“New technology drives our exploration of the Moon, Mars, and beyond,” said Jim Reuter, associate administrator for NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate. “Developing these early designs will help us lay the groundwork for powering our long-term human presence on other worlds.”
Battelle Energy Alliance, the managing and operating contractor for Idaho National Laboratory, led the Request for Proposal development, evaluation, and procurement sponsored by NASA. Idaho National Laboratory will award 12-month contracts to the following companies to each develop preliminary designs:
- Lockheed Martin of Bethesda, Maryland – The company will partner with BWXT and Creare.
- Westinghouse of Cranberry Township, Pennsylvania – The company will partner with Aerojet Rocketdyne.
- IX of Houston, Texas, a joint venture of Intuitive Machines and X-Energy – The company will partner with Maxar and Boeing.
“The Fission Surface Power project is a very achievable first step toward the United States establishing nuclear power on the Moon,” said Idaho National Laboratory Director John Wagner. “I look forward to seeing what each of these teams will accomplish.”
The Phase 1 awards will provide NASA critical information from industry that can lead to a joint development of a full flight-certified fission power system. Fission surface power technologies also will help NASA mature nuclear propulsion systems that rely on reactors to generate power. These systems could be used for deep space exploration missions.
NASA’s fission surface power project is managed by the agency’s Glenn Research Center in Cleveland. The power system development is funded by the Space Technology Mission Directorate’s Technology Demonstration Missions program, which is located at Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama.
For more information about NASA’s investments in space technology, visit:
28 responses to “NASA Announces Artemis Concept Awards for Nuclear Power on Moon”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
never happen but its essential
Could be done with solar and batteries. Sure it would cost a lot, but so does developing, deploying and maintaining nuclear power stations for the moon. Nuclear is nice and compact though.
Meanwhile, although I’m quite skeptical regarding the practicality and viability of mining lunar ice, if they do get that going, refuelable surface fuel cells could be enabled.
I imagine there will be a mix of all three of the above (can pretty much rule out wind, fossil fuels and hydroelectric though 🙂 )
if there is a product to mine, they will find develop power until then
Meaning, you are not convinced that there are mine-able* water reserves on the lunar surface?
*(I’d wanted to write “commercially viable”, but the government can operate at quite a loss if it is determined to do so, Maybe the right word is simply “viable”)
Or that we need nuclear power to mine water to use it to generate power. Sounds about right, though 🙂
Meaning, you are not convinced that there are mine-able* water reserves on the lunar surface?”
the evidence is clear that there is H2O what I dont know (and I could be behind the curve on research 🙂 ) is how concentrated it is? and 2) based on that what the total mining effort is going to be to get to enough of it to make 1 gallon. It would be great if there is an iceberg the size of the one that sank Titanic buried X number of feet underneath the surface and lots of them but the stuff I have seen is that there is going to have to be a lot of “collection” to get to a jug of water. and what that mix is will determine the energy to get to it as well as the cost
in WW2 the federal government drilled a well on our farm that is 3000 feet deep. we have four other wells that are anywhere from 1200 to 80 feet deep. none of them have ever run dry in the decades they have been in operation AND other then routine and cheap maintenance and the cost of electricity the cost to recover water from them is negligible
it wont be that way on the moon for a long long time if ever
What do water wells in coastal Texas have to do with ice on the Moon? About all that shows is that many space policy experts aren’t able to think from a space perspective and keep confusing their thinking with Earth analogs.
The interesting thing about the possibility of lunar ice is that there many be other useful elements like Carbon and Nitrogen in it in various chemical compounds which would be useful. But given that water is nearly 90 percent Oxygen by mass it will be fairly easy to just manufacture it anywhere on the lunar surface by just bringing Hydrogen up from Earth to mix with LOX from the regolith.
what it has to do with it, is that 1) it is unlikely that lunar water is not going to have a massive reoccuring cost…and 2) the cost to get setup to get it is going to be enormous. this is the problem with space and humans…everything from the air to the water to waste rmoval is going to need very high technology with very high reoccurring cost. water on earth is cheap
If it has a massive recurring cost, it won’t happen. The only way anyone will make use of lunar water is if they can figure out how to do so as simply as possible: such as with TransAstra’s Radiant Gas Dynamics.
Or possibly the steam lance. Sealed volume with a hot gas lance boiling out volatile materials collected in gas form in the sealed volume.
That would be another interesting approach. Hopefully we have the budget to try out multiple methods.
exactly. I just dont think that there is any incentive NOW to even try
Early efforts are not always rational; the current epoch for spaceflight is more akin to the Phoenicians’ construction of the first oceangoing ships, rather than the Pilgrims settling the New World.
agreed. I think we are half a century or more away from serious human flight.
Yes, water is everywhere on Earth as, but still don’t see the point about drilling wells.
once drilled and operational their cost is negligible. the vast majority of the worlds water systems once established are cheap to operate, this wont be true with lunar water. there will always be a hunt for it
Yes, in areas like you live in where it’s everywhere and there is no need to conserve it. But in large parts of the West the hunt for fresh water goes on as we speak which is why the technology that will need to be developed for recycling water in space communities will find a ready market on Earth. It is also why the old fashioned methods of agriculture are being replaced by CEA systems that recycle water.
That said, it is also why it is unlikely lunar water will be used for fuel for very long. Instead rockets will bring enough Hydrogen or Methane for the round trip and just top off on lunar Oxygen, which is the majority of the mass of most liquid rockets.
that is not true in the developed world and in the undeveloped world where its true it is based on lack of money.
as for lunar O2. that is going to be a massive strip mining program
“What do water wells in coastal Texas have to do with ice on the Moon?”
There is a very real possibility that the cost per gallon of water pulled easily from a well in Texas and transported to the moon will be appreciably less than that of a gallon of water obtained by mining and refining tens of thousands of cubic meters of regolith, especially considering the size of the market volume that will have to amortize the costs of developing and starting up the technology (small if the only consumers are government funded explorers/researchers and ultra-rich tourists).
How much systems like Starship/SuperHeavy bring down the transportation cost, and how accessible lunar water turns out to be are the determining factors of which will be the more viable approach, and they are still both relatively unknown.
Logistics 101, never ship what is available locally.
1. Research shows it will be possible to produce Oxygen in quantity anywhere on the lunar surface.
2. 88% of the mass of water is Oxygen, so why pay to ship Oxygen to the Moon?
3. Instead just ship the Hydrogen, and for each 12 tons of Hydrogen you get 100 tons of water by combining it with Oxygen, plus energy from the combustion. If shipping Hydrogen by itself is too difficult just ship it as Ammonia or Methane, also delivering Nitrogen and Carbon to the Moon where both are needed.
So lunar water is only of value if it costs less than producing LOX from the lunar regolith and shipping Hydrogen. A simple economic trade study.
Business 101. Unless it’s more cost effective to ship.
Yes, a simple economic trade study once the engineers come up with the numbers to use.
Cost kg Lunar Oxygen
Cost kg mining lunar water
Cost kg of delivering water from Earth
Cost kg of delivering Hydrogen from Earth
Each of course in the form of a curve based on the volume needed.
As a side note, when tanker Starships are about used up it would it may make sense to launch them one last time to orbit full of Methane, stripped of heat shields and fins, then refuel them so they land on the Moon. After you drain the tanks just salvage the steel. Then ship the engines back to orbit, or keep them as spares.
My opinion is that Lunar water will be cost effective to mine. Once some people with profit motivation get a shot at it, a lot of these chintzy little efforts will be a joke. I could likely list a dozen possible extraction methods, even while being aware that it will probably be a technique that I never heard of.
At the same time cost of alternatives like shipping must appear in the spreadsheet.
Yes, once on site the mining of it should be straight forward.
The problem is that it is located near the poles and if you are going to industrialize the Moon there are probably other, better, areas to locate facilities. So you will probably need to ship the water those sites.
“Logistics 101, never ship what is available locally.”
Economics 101, always buy at the lowest cost, regardless of whether it is shipped.
Tbat’s why so much manufacturing business was offshored from the US to China. American business didn’t prioritize simpler logistics over economics.
1 Research has not shown that the cost of devloping industrial scale regolith harvesting and oxygen extraction opertions and equipment will produce oxygen on the moon at a lower per kilogram cost than distillig atmospheric oxygen on Earth and shippig it to the moon. Again, the size of the market for lunar oxygen will dictate the ability to amortize development costs.
2 if it ends up being cheaper (including amortizing the costs of develiping the industry to extract at scale) to sbip oxygen to the Moon, economics will be the reason.
3 again, its all down to the economics. It is not a given that the economic model will favor local extraction and refining.
“A simple economic trade study” Exactlly.
“Could be done with solar and batteries.”
How could it be achieved with solar and batteries? Don’t the surface fission power projects selected for the program, use nuclear fission, by definition? How can that be accomplished with solar panels?
It’s a trade-off, the cost/reliability of nuclear power, versus the cost/reliability of solar/battery power for lunar facilities.
Also there is the question of when the power is needed. Many industrial and mining activities could be done during the Lunar Day when solar energy is available, and then stand down during the Lunar Night when it isn’t. The Lunar Night is then use for maintenance and repair to prepare for the next Lunar Day.
The contracts are for developing killowatt class fission power generators.
Solar and batteries will have their place on the lunar surface (and already do). I just don’t see how they’ll do this job, which is fission based, by definition.
About time. Nuclear power is the ideal lunar power source.