Administration directs NASA toward lunar nuclear power and commercial stations in new budget push

The White House is proposing a shift in NASA’s priorities that would boost human exploration funding by roughly $1 billion and issue two new directives intended to speed U.S. return to the Moon and secure continued American presence in low Earth orbit, according to an opinion piece published by a senior administration official writing as acting NASA administrator.

The plan, described in the op‑ed as a rebalance of the agency toward “real exploration,” calls first for deploying small modular nuclear reactors — often termed fission surface power — on the lunar surface to provide reliable, continuous energy for future crewed bases. The second directive would accelerate the development of commercially operated space stations to ensure there is no gap in U.S. presence after the International Space Station is retired in 2030.

Administration officials and the op‑ed argued the measures are intended to curb programmatic delays and cost growth that have slowed deep‑space human exploration in recent decades, and to sharpen the agency’s focus on crewed missions as a strategic counter to China’s expanding lunar ambitions. The op‑ed said the directives would move technologies that have been studied for years "out of the lab and into the field."

NASA has not sent astronauts beyond low Earth orbit since the last Apollo mission in 1972. The agency’s current flagship lunar initiative, the Artemis program, aims to return crews to the Moon and establish a sustainable presence as a stepping stone to Mars. The administration’s proposal frames additional resources and the two directives as a way to safeguard Artemis and accelerate milestones.

The proposal addresses two programmatic pressures facing NASA. First, lunar surface operations have been constrained by available power; past crewed missions lasted only a few days. Fission surface power concepts would provide continuous energy for habitats, science, and long‑duration stays, proponents say. Second, the International Space Station, a multinational laboratory providing a continuous U.S. presence in orbit since 2000, is slated for retirement in 2030 under current plans. The administration argues that without a coordinated transition, the United States could face a gap before commercial orbital platforms become available.

Advocates in the op‑ed framed the moves as part of a broader push to reduce what they characterized as bureaucratic overhead and project bloat, pointing to long‑running and costly programs such as the Space Launch System and the Mars Sample Return campaign as examples of programs that have consumed large sums and experienced repeated delays.

Not all stakeholders share the administration’s assessment. Scientific and programmatic critics have warned that prioritizing human exploration and commercial station development could divert funding from other NASA science and technology programs, including Earth science, planetary science, and astrophysics. Those critics say long‑term innovation depends on balanced investments across research, robotic missions and human spaceflight rather than shifting funds away from one category to another.

International competition is central to the administration’s framing. The op‑ed and administration statements point to China’s plans for lunar infrastructure as a motivating factor, saying that a sustained U.S. presence on and around the Moon is important for strategic and leadership reasons. China has made steady progress on lunar robotic missions and has signaled long‑term ambitions for human‑rated lunar activity, prompting renewed attention in Washington to space policy and funding.

Any change in NASA’s budgetary priorities will be subject to congressional approval. Lawmakers have historically debated the balance between human exploration, science, and commercial partnerships. Congress will consider the administration’s budget request alongside its own appropriations bills, and debates are expected over the scale and direction of funding increases, technical readiness of proposed lunar power systems, and the timeline for privatized low‑Earth‑orbit platforms.

NASA and industry officials have emphasized the role of public‑private partnerships in a transition off the ISS and in sustaining long‑term exploration goals, but timelines and costs for commercial stations and fission surface power demonstrations remain to be finalized. The proposed directives signal the administration’s intent to prioritize those paths, while the outcome will depend on technical development, program management and legislative action in the months ahead.