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.<\/p>\n
In January, NASA, the US space agency, announced plans to develop<\/a> 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.<\/p>\n Recommended Stories list of 4 itemsend of list<\/p>\n The reactors will be needed to power mining of frozen water trapped deep in the moon\u2019s craters, which scientists believe could supply drinking water, air, and rocket fuel for future bases. The reactors would also provide power for lunar bases.<\/p>\n Here is what we know.<\/p>\n Which countries want to put nuclear reactors on the moon?<\/p>\n The US said NASA\u2019s Lunar Reactor 1 would produce 20 kilowatts of electricity, creating enough power to run on its own for five years without maintenance.<\/p>\n NASA\u2019s 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.<\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n The Selena reactor is expected to be even lighter than NASA\u2019s, weighing about 1,100 to 1,300kg (2,400 to 2,800 lbs) for an easier and softer landing on the lunar surface.<\/p>\n This would not be the first time nuclear reactors have been placed in outer space.<\/p>\n The Soviet Union launched more than 30 nuclear fission reactors into Earth\u2019s orbit between the late 1960s and the 1980s to power spy satellites during the Cold War.<\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n That experiment<\/a> 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.<\/p>\n Previous attempts by the US to develop nuclear projects have stalled due to shifting budget priorities<\/a>.<\/p>\n How do you put nuclear reactors on the moon?<\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n Why does the moon need a nuclear reactor?<\/p>\n The US, China and Russia want to build bases near the moon\u2019s 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.<\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n Tech billionaire Elon Musk has also said he wants to extract minerals such as aluminium, titanium, and silicon, required for manufacturing satellites.<\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n Simon Middleburgh, director of Bangor University\u2019s 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.<\/p>\n Nuclear energy is the \u201cobvious choice\u201d, Middleburgh said, adding that it must be used \u201cresponsibly\u201d.<\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n Why the rush?<\/p>\n It comes down to geopolitics.<\/p>\n