2026 November 05 « nuclear-news

Why are US, Russia and China racing to put nuclear reactors on the moon?

The risk is bigger if a running reactor falls back onto Earth, analysts say.

Who is responsible if something goes wrong?

Lunar reactors could revolutionise moon exploration, providing energy for bases and mining, but risks of contamination remain.

By Mariem Bah, 31 Oct 26, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/10/31/why-are-us-russia-and-china-racing-to-put-nuclear-reactors-on-the-moon

The United States, Russia and China are racing to build nuclear reactors on the moon, as scientists warn about the possible risk of a radioactive mishap.

In January, NASA, the US space agency, announced plans to develop a nuclear reactor on the moon by the end of 2030. Russia, working with China, aims to do the same by 2036 as they strive to advance space exploration.

The reactors will be needed to power mining of frozen water trapped deep in the moon’s craters, which scientists believe could supply drinking water, air, and rocket fuel for future bases. The reactors would also provide power for lunar bases.

Here is what we know.

Which countries want to put nuclear reactors on the moon?

The US said NASA’s Lunar Reactor 1 would produce 20 kilowatts of electricity, creating enough power to run on its own for five years without maintenance.

NASA’s reactor is designed to be compact, weighing under 6,000kg (13,200 lbs) and will fit inside a rocket compartment measuring 3.7 metres (12 feet) long by 5.5 metres (18 ft) wide.

Russia is also building a nuclear reactor, which is expected to produce 10 kilowatts. The reactor, called Selena, will be able to run for a decade without maintenance. It will be ready to power a Chinese-led moon base by about 2036.

The Selena reactor is expected to be even lighter than NASA’s, weighing about 1,100 to 1,300kg (2,400 to 2,800 lbs) for an easier and softer landing on the lunar surface.

This would not be the first time nuclear reactors have been placed in outer space.

The Soviet Union launched more than 30 nuclear fission reactors into Earth’s orbit between the late 1960s and the 1980s to power spy satellites during the Cold War.

The small, 1,000kg (2,200 lbs) reactors powered radar-tracking spy satellites using heat from splitting uranium atoms into 3 to 5 kilowatts of electricity. They are no longer operational, and no other country has sent nuclear reactors into space.

The US has spent $20bn on advanced space nuclear programmes over the past 70 years, but has never successfully launched a nuclear reactor into space since an experiment in 1965.

That experiment was carried out to see if nuclear energy could power a satellite. It worked at first but accidentally shut down after just 43 days because a non-nuclear electrical part of the satellite broke down. It is still floating up in space today.

Previous attempts by the US to develop nuclear projects have stalled due to shifting budget priorities.

How do you put nuclear reactors on the moon?

First, scientists will have to build a reactor on Earth, which will then be transported to the moon using a robotic spacecraft that fires rocket engines for a slow and gentle touchdown.

Both the US and Russia say they would keep their reactors switched off until they reach the moon, to keep radioactive risk at a minimum until the last step.

Once set up on the moon, the reactors would be designed to run without maintenance for years, supplying power to bases engaged in mining on the lunar surface.

Why does the moon need a nuclear reactor?

The US, China and Russia want to build bases near the moon’s south pole, close to the known sources of water ice. The ice sits in the permanently shadowed craters, where sunlight has not reached for millions of years.

As well as powering the moon bases, the reactors would also supply enough power for mining. So far, the US, Russia and China want to mine for frozen water which, once released, could be used to support life on the moon at bases where people could live and conduct research.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk has also said he wants to extract minerals such as aluminium, titanium, and silicon, required for manufacturing satellites.

Solar power for such endeavours would be limited as the sun shines on any one spot on the moon only half the time, so solar panels would go dark for about two weeks every month.

Simon Middleburgh, director of Bangor University’s Nuclear Futures Institute (NFI), told Al Jazeera that solar power is too limited to provide the steady flow of energy a moon base would need, while batteries and diesel are too costly, because everything has to be launched from Earth.

Nuclear energy is the “obvious choice”, Middleburgh said, adding that it must be used “responsibly”.

It is likely that three or four reactors working together would be required to provide sufficient energy for mining lunar ice as well as supporting a moon base, he added.

Why the rush?It comes down to geopolitics.

In a December 2025 executive order, US President Donald Trump ordered NASA to build a lunar reactor ready to launch by 2030. Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin have revealed similar plans.

In August this year, Sean Duffy, the US transportation secretary, said the US is in a “race to the moon, in a race with China”.

Middleburgh said the 2030 deadline is likely for building the reactor itself, but the harder part will be landing on the moon and safely setting up the system.

“The biggest challenge isn’t really the nuclear technology at all; it is the regulation for launch, the availability of a launch platform itself, and the landing and setting up the system on the lunar surface ready for it to be operated sustainably and safely,” he said.

The race to the moon also comes amid growing military competition beyond Earth. In September, the US announced it had deployed weapons into orbit, which officials said would be used to defend US forces.

While the US did not provide details about these “weapons”, experts say they are likely to be space-based communications jammers, rather than kinetic ones that launch strikes.

The announcement raised concerns about the concept of “space weapons” or the use of space for military purposes, including the potential targeting of satellites that provide GPS, communications and intelligence.

What could go wrong?

Middleburgh told Al Jazeera that an accident during the launch of the reactors would be less frightening than it sounds because uranium alone, before it is used in a reactor, is not very radioactive. However, that changes once the reactor is switched on.

The risk is bigger if a running reactor falls back onto Earth, analysts say.

In 1978, a Soviet satellite carrying a reactor, Kosmos 954, scattered radioactive material across nearly 124,300 square km (48,000sq miles) of northern Canada.

The accident forced an expensive military cleanup of the highly radioactive fragments and microscopic particles.

On the moon, Middleburgh says, any contaminated area would be “extremely localised” if there were to be a similar accident.

Who has sovereignty over the moon?

Legally, no one. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty bans countries from “claiming” the moon or any part of it, though they have ownership of the equipment they send there. The treaty does not ban nuclear power in space.

Antonino Salmeri, director of the Lunar Policy Platform, a nonprofit, told Al Jazeera that a reactor can be lawful if it follows the treaty’s principles, including peaceful use and avoiding harmful contamination.

Norbert Schorghofer, a senior scientist at the Planetary Science Institute in Arizona, US, told Al Jazeera all signatories “have the right to mine the lunar surface as long as it is for peaceful purposes”.

Whichever country’s reactor gets to the “best” water ice first could claim a “safety zone”, which would not be a land claim but could operate like one. Salmeri said declaring one creates no territorial rights, but a reactor shuts others out anyway, because nobody wants to enter a radioactive area.

A Lunar Policy Platform report released last month points to another problem: Who is responsible if something goes wrong? The report says existing liability rules have not been designed to regulate the use of long-term hazardous equipment on another celestial body.

November 5, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | China, Russia, space travel, USA | Leave a comment

AI data centres could undermine UK’s emissions goals

Ofgem, the energy market regulator, says data centre developers are seeking connections totalling 72 gigawatts. The peak electricity demand across the whole country last year was 45 gigawatts.

Hayley Mortimer and Adrian Goldberg, BBC, 2 Nov 260

The UK government’s ambition of achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050 could be undermined by its new deal on AI data centres, according to BBC research.

During Wednesday’s Budget speech, Chancellor John Healey said data centres would be allowed to build onsite power generation while they wait for a grid connection.

BBC File on 4 Investigates has discovered that four planned “hyperscale” data centres – including three in the south of England – are already considering using gas-fired power to meet their electricity needs, creating more CO2 than the cities of Manchester, Liverpool and Southampton combined.

Labour MP Toby Perkins, who chairs the Environmental Audit Select Committee, said a substantial increase in the use of natural gas “can’t be the future”.

“Government absolutely shouldn’t be in the business of just saying anyone who wants to bring it here, can do whatever you like to power it, because that is not acceptable,” he said.

The government said data centres were “essential to Britain’s economy” and that its new Data Centre Covenant set clear expectations for developers to pay a fair share of the costs they impose on the energy system and deliver benefits for local communities.

Data centres are warehouses full of powerful computer servers used to run a vast range of digital services, including streaming, banking and public services and have been part of the British landscape for more than two decades.

But a new generation of data centres due to come on stream in the next few years will operate on a much larger scale to cope with the growing computing demand needed for increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence technology.

They will consume considerably more energy than their predecessors at a time when the National Grid is already struggling to meet demand.

Ofgem, the energy market regulator, says data centre developers are seeking connections totalling 72 gigawatts. The peak electricity demand across the whole country last year was 45 gigawatts.

Such is the demand for access to the already under-strain national electricity grid, some data centre developers have been told they could be waiting up to 10 years for the system to be upgraded to provide them with a connection.

Nathan MacWhinnie, head of market intelligence and oversight at Ofgem, said: “In a lot of places, the grid is at capacity. I think sometimes it’s easy to forget the scale of the demand of these connections. These projects are sometimes the size of cities.”

In last week’s Budget, the chancellor announced a British Data Centre Covenant, requiring operators to invest in local communities, create jobs and protect water supplies in return for priority grid connections.

But he also said that where grid connections were unavailable, developers would be permitted to generate their own power on-site………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqvgrvx6ekl2o

November 5, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change, technology, UK | Leave a comment

Submission to AUKUS Public Inquiry -Australia should quit alliance with the UK and US – Dr Gideon Maxwell Polya.

No.258

“……………………My submission is in 3 parts and summarizes several detailed articles that set out why
Australia should quit alliance with the UK and US.

(A). As a UK lackey, US lackey or major climate criminal country Australia has
violated all circa 80 Indo-Pacific countries.

In 2021 Australia formed the anti-China AUKUS (Australia, UK and US) Alliance and
thence the Quad (Australia, India, US and Japan) Alliance to contain a supposedly
aggressive China. In reality as a nuclear terrorist, climate criminal, serial invader
and subversive entity Australia has violated all Indo-Pacific countries (see Gideon
Polya, “AUKUS & Quad In Context: Australia Violates All Indo-Pacific countries”,
Countercurrents, 9 December 2021: https://countercurrents.org/2021/12/aukus-qu
ad-in-context-australia-violates-all-indo-pacific-countries/ and for an exhaustively
referenced version see Gideon Polya, “Australia violates all Indo-Pacific countries”,
Stop state terrorism, 9 December 2021: https://sites.google.com/site/stopstateterr
orism/2021-12-09-australia-violates-all-indo-pacific-countries ).

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

………………………………………As a UK and thence US lackey, Australia in the last 80 years (i.e. WW2 onwards)
has had armed forces in many countries of the Indo-Pacific region, and has joined
the US in massive invasions and occupations. Australia has participated in all
post-1950 US Asian Wars (atrocities in which 40 million Asians have died from
violence and war-imposed deprivation). Anti-Arab anti-Semitic Australia has been
an enthusiastic participant in the US War on Terror (over 30 million Muslims have
died from violence and imposed deprivation in 20 countries invaded by the US
Alliance since the US Government-exploited 9/11 atrocity that killed 3,000 people).
The joint US-Australian telecommunications spying base at Pine Gap in Central
Australia targets war criminal US drone strikes on 7 Muslim countries.

As US lackeys Australians have been involved with the US in covert subversion of
many Indo-Pacific countries, and were successful in achieving regime change in 8
instances, namely Laos (1960), Indonesia (1965), Cambodia (1970), Chile (1973),
Australia (1975), Fiji (1987), Fiji (2000), and Australia (2010) (the latter 3 also
involving Apartheid Israel). Australia is second only to the US as a fervent
supporter of nuclear terrorist, genocidally racist, grossly human rights-abusing and
globally subversive Apartheid Israel, and hence of the utterly vile and intolerable
crime of Apartheid…………………………………………………………………………………………………

(B). Why Australia should quit military links with serial war criminal, genocidally
racist and egregiously mendacious America.

For a detailed and exhaustively referenced analysis see Gideon Polya, “Why
Australia Should Quit Military Links With Serial War Criminal America”,
Countercurrents, 28 January 2023: https://countercurrents.org/2023/01/why-austr
alia-should-quit-military-links-with-serial-war-criminal-america/ . Summarized
below are cogent arguments why Australia should quit its AUKUS alliance with
nuclear terrorist, genocidally racist and serial war criminal America and the UK.

(1). War typically violates International law, and is the penultimate in repugnant
racism, with genocide being the ultimate in racism…………………………………………..

(2). The US is a horrendous serial invader of other countries. Apart from inevitable
border spats, most countries in the world have not invaded other countries…………………………………………………

(3). War criminal active and passive mass murder by nuclear terrorist America and
the US Alliance. Iraq and Afghanistan were not the only countries murderously
violated by the US in the 21st century. It was estimated in 2015 that 32 million
Muslims had died from violence (5 million) and imposed deprivation (27 million) in
20 countries invaded by the US Alliance after the US Government-exploited 9/11
atrocity that killed 3,000 people, mostly innocent Americans…………………………………………………

(4) American lying ………………………… As cogently analysed by
Professors Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky in “Manufacturing Consent”,
mendacious US Mainstream media serve the interests of the US Establishment and
US governments.

(5). America violates, subverts, dirties and acutely threatens Australia.
(i). Australia was involved in all post-1950 US Asian wars.
(ii). AUKUS and Australian violation of all Indo-Pacific countries.
(iii). Australian involvement in 8 US-effected coups.
(iv). US lackey Australia’s deadly covert operations in neighbouring Indonesia.
(v). The US Murdoch media empire dominates Australia.
(vi). America spies on, subverts, deceives and betrays Australia.
(vii). UK- , US-, and Zionist-backed coups and other subversive interventions in
Australia.
(viii). Craven submission to American militarism makes Australia complicit in
nuclear terrorism and makes Australia a prime nuclear target.
(ix). Zionist subversion of IHRA member Australia is a product of blind Australian
fealty to Zionist-subverted America and soils Australia.

(x). Locked-in support for US militarism and militarist fiscal perversion inescapably
contributes to 100,000 preventable Australian deaths annually.

(xi). Australia is complicit in horrendous UK and US war crimes, notably in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
(xii). Blind support for the US has created a contemptible, reality-ignoring,
“look-the-other-way” Australian national culture.
(xiii). US lies and terror hysteria impacting Australian civil liberties.
(xiv). Genocidal US, US Alliance and Australia need de-Nazification.
(C). The AUKUS Alliance betrays, robs, soils, threatens and kills Australians.

………………………………… (i). AUKUS betrays Australians. The AUKUS deal supposedly protects Australian
sovereignty but the opposite is true. The nuclear submarines (if delivered) would
become Australia-crewed adjuncts to the naval strategy of a serial war-making US.
The deal locks an impotent Australia into US war-making strategy against our
biggest trading partner, China. Conversely, military strategy expert Albert Palazzo
(“The Big Fix”) argues that middle-power Australia should revert from a US-led
“strategic offensive” position to an efficient, effective and Australia-first “strategic
defensive” position. Our AUKUS partner, Zionist-perverted America, gets Australia
to hugely subsidize US war industry, makes Australia a prime nuclear target, and
substitutes hugely expensive, submarine hunting , White Elephant “sitting ducks”
for an intelligent, multi-faceted and high technology defence system.

(ii). AUKUS robs Australians. The Australia Institute estimates that the cost could
be $500 billion for a few second-hand, US-controlled, US-assisting, single-purpose
submarines that may already be detectable and vulnerable to the latest
AI-assisted anti-submarine technology. The US war industry gets A$500 billion and
in return Australia becomes a prime nuclear target, and gets locked into an absurd
“strategic offensive” position for the benefit of the US instead of an expert-advised
“strategic defensive” position for the defence of Australia.

(iii). AUKUS soils Australia. Racism is vile because to whom we are born and by
whom we are raised is out of our control. War is the penultimate in racism and
genocide the ultimate. The UK has invaded 193 countries or nearly every country.
Only 3 countries have not had a US military presence. Before WW2 the British
committed genocide on all inhabited continents whereas the US (African slavery
and Pacific islands aside) largely confined itself to the American Indian genocide
and domination of Latin America. After WW2 the UK replaced colonialism with
deadly neo-colonialism but also participated in the (deaths from violence and
deprivation in brackets) Palestinian (3 million), Korean (5 million), Iraqi (5 million), Libyan (0.2 million) and Afghan (7 million) Genocides. The US invaded a swathe of
countries around the world after WW2…………………………………………………………………….

(iv). AUKUS threatens Australians. The Australia-US joint spying base at Pine Gap,
Central Australia, plays a key role US nuclear terrorism and in targeting US and
Israeli bombing. Australia is constructing a huge base for nuclear-armed US
submarines in Western Australia, is expanding the Tindal air base in the Northern
Territory to host potentially nuclear-armed B-52 bombers, and hosts a
3,000-personnel US Marine base near Darwin. AUKUS makes Australia a prime
nuclear target – in any escalating nuclear war key bases in Australia and Australian
cities would be bombed before bombing any US cities………………………………………………….

(v). AUKUS will kill Australians. AUKUS will remove $500 billion from Australia’s
capacity to keep Australians alive and healthy via its prosperous economy-based
world-leading universal health care system, the National Disability Insurance
Scheme (NDIS), the education system, and preventive medicine…………………………………………………………. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1s1_Y3ywvk8ywqTLFvhOt3RfBFZfYH25g/view

November 5, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | AUSTRALIA, politics | Leave a comment

600 MW floating nuclear power barge targets US in world-first offshore advanced SMR bid

Rather than building a conventional inland plant from scratch, Saltfoss will divide production between two allied industrial hubs.

ByAman Tripathi, Interesting EngineeringNov 04, 2026

A Danish nuclear developer wants to bring floating atomic power to American shores. Saltfoss has sent a letter of intent to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The firm wants to start early regulatory talks for its offshore power barge and seaMSR-100 reactor.

If approved, the project will mark the world’s first licensed maritime advanced small modular reactor (SMR). The timing is interesting. In March 2026, the NRC introduced 10 CFR Part 53. This modern regulatory rulebook has been designed specifically for advanced reactors. Saltfoss aims to become the first developer to secure a license under this new framework.

Instead of building a conventional plant inland from the ground up, Saltfoss plans to split production between two allied industrial hubs.

Samsung Heavy Industries will build the standardized steel barges in South Korea, using the country’s high-volume shipbuilding yards. Once the hulls are complete, teams in the United States will handle reactor assembly, fuel loading, and final integration.

“As part of its US expansion, Saltfoss will significantly increase its activities in the United States, including reactor assembly, fuel loading and final power plant integration at US facilities,” said the company in a press release.

International regulatory alignment

The company is also coordinating reviews across the Pacific. Saltfoss is working with South Korea’s Nuclear Safety and Security Commission under the nation’s SMR Special Act. South Korea is expected to host some of the earliest commercial deployments.

Meanwhile, maritime safety evaluations are already under way. The American Bureau of Shipping is qualifying the barge design through its formal new technology review………………………..

Each standardized seaMSR-100 unit yields 100 megawatts of electricity (MWe). Multiple modules can sit aboard a single barge to deliver up to 600 MWe of constant electricity and high-temperature industrial heat. This capacity can power remote coastal industries, municipal grids, or power-hungry hyperscale data centers………………………………………

Saltfoss finalized its conceptual design in 2025 alongside the Idaho National Laboratory and Danish researchers. The company plans to submit its formal Regulatory Engagement Plan to Washington in early 2027. https://interestingengineering.com/energy/600-mw-floating-nuclear-power-barge

November 5, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment