Quote from: Proponent on 08/08/2025 02:00 am At 1:03 in the video, Duffy says:It's a hundred-kilowatt output. That's the same amount of energy a 2000-square-foot home uses every three and a half days.He doesn't understand the difference between energy and power. Ugh.I noticed that too. I am not surprised. Duffy is not an engineer. It will be interesting to see if Trump ever appoints an administrator.
At 1:03 in the video, Duffy says:It's a hundred-kilowatt output. That's the same amount of energy a 2000-square-foot home uses every three and a half days.He doesn't understand the difference between energy and power. Ugh.
Quote from: Eric Hedman on 08/08/2025 02:52 amQuote from: Proponent on 08/08/2025 02:00 am At 1:03 in the video, Duffy says:It's a hundred-kilowatt output. That's the same amount of energy a 2000-square-foot home uses every three and a half days.He doesn't understand the difference between energy and power. Ugh.I noticed that too. I am not surprised. Duffy is not an engineer. It will be interesting to see if Trump ever appoints an administrator.You're right, it's not surprising Duffy doesn't know a watt from a watt-hour. Reflecting on it, what bothers me most is that Duffy did not bother to have his statement vetted by a competent person.
Background: [...]• FSP directly addresses the top two technology shortfalls listed in NASA's 2024 Civil Space Shortfall Ranking document: # 1 to enable systems to survive and operate through the lunar night; and #2 to provide a source of high-power energy generation for the Moon and Mars surfaces.• Industry has provided data-driven feedback to NASA that surface power needs are at least 100kWe for long-term human operations including in-situ resource utilization.• The President's Budget Request (PBR) for FY2026 includes $350M in FY26 for a new Mars Technology program that will accelerate the development of high priority technologies for Mars, (i.e. FSP). This funding ramps up to $500M starting in FY27.• Significant additional funds will be available as NASA transitions to commercial services for Artemis IV and beyond
This Fission surface power RFP shall feature:• The ability to award to two providers within six months ofthe release of the RFP with the option to down-select to one provider at PDR• Flexibility to industry provider in extent of demonstration capability - Minimum 100kWe power output - Assumed use of a heavy class lander (up to 15 metric tons mass available) - Readiness to launch by the first quarter of FY30• A closed Brayton cycle power conversion system to reduce risk and ensure extensibility to higher power systems• NASA's funded Space Act Authority (SAA) to grant maximum flexibility to industry in how to efficiently design and develop FSP flight systems• Completion of an operational space flight system and an option for continued sustainment support• Flexibility to NASA to award contract value based on proposed industry capability, potential industry cost-sharing (i.e., in exchange for industry owning and operating the reactor power once operational), and availability of funds • Payments via milestones with no less than 25% of the total contract value paid after the successful checkout and delivery of the FSP flight system.
To further advance U.S. competitiveness and lunar surface leadership, NASA shall: [...]• Mandate FSP-readiness in upcoming lunar cargo transportation services solicitations, including structural and thermal compatibility requirements.• Provide priority to power systems capable of supporting ISRU and in-situ manufacturing demonstrations by FY30.
• Within 60 days of this directive, ESDMD shall issue a new procurement Request for Proposal (RFP) to industry.
[...] There is some logic in skipping the prototype and going directly to a nuclear reactor that will become operational (at 100kWe) as soon as possible.
Quote from: Proponent on 08/08/2025 11:50 amQuote from: Eric Hedman on 08/08/2025 02:52 amQuote from: Proponent on 08/08/2025 02:00 am At 1:03 in the video, Duffy says:It's a hundred-kilowatt output. That's the same amount of energy a 2000-square-foot home uses every three and a half days.He doesn't understand the difference between energy and power. Ugh.I noticed that too. I am not surprised. Duffy is not an engineer. It will be interesting to see if Trump ever appoints an administrator.You're right, it's not surprising Duffy doesn't know a watt from a watt-hour. Reflecting on it, what bothers me most is that Duffy did not bother to have his statement vetted by a competent person.It was a press conference not related to NASA, he didn't expect that question. It's not a big deal.
NASA Advances Lunar Nuclear Plan With Commercial FocusQuoteThe draft provides few new details about NASA’s requirements. One, restated from the directive, is that the system use a closed Brayton cycle power conversion system — a signal, industry officials said, that NASA wants the technology to scale to higher-power systems...Under the Space Act Agreement structure, the company would own the reactor and sell power to NASA and other customers. The AFPP requires proposers to submit a financing plan “showing how cash from operations, financing, and NASA covers the expenses of the total end-to-end deployment of the FSP system.”Proposers must also provide a “Commercial Lunar Power Business Plan” outlining the strategy, potential customers and market size. “The market should include or leverage customers other than NASA,” the draft states...NASA’s blended approach is a “risky combination,” said Bhavya Lal, a former NASA associate administrator for technology, policy and strategy and a co-author of the report, in a SpaceNews webinar Aug. 28.“It means doing a whole lot of first-of-its-kind things at once,” she said, from reactor design to a launch authorization process that has never been used.https://spacenews.com/nasa-advances-lunar-nuclear-plan-with-commercial-focus/
The draft provides few new details about NASA’s requirements. One, restated from the directive, is that the system use a closed Brayton cycle power conversion system — a signal, industry officials said, that NASA wants the technology to scale to higher-power systems...Under the Space Act Agreement structure, the company would own the reactor and sell power to NASA and other customers. The AFPP requires proposers to submit a financing plan “showing how cash from operations, financing, and NASA covers the expenses of the total end-to-end deployment of the FSP system.”Proposers must also provide a “Commercial Lunar Power Business Plan” outlining the strategy, potential customers and market size. “The market should include or leverage customers other than NASA,” the draft states...NASA’s blended approach is a “risky combination,” said Bhavya Lal, a former NASA associate administrator for technology, policy and strategy and a co-author of the report, in a SpaceNews webinar Aug. 28.“It means doing a whole lot of first-of-its-kind things at once,” she said, from reactor design to a launch authorization process that has never been used.
Fission Surface Power System - Draft Announcement for Partnership Proposalshttps://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/e33becf3872a473dbeea39d446baf397/view
NASA Acting Administrator Sean Duffy@SecDuffyNASA·.@NASA is working with the space industry to put a safe and reliable power source on the Moon so we can create a lasting American presence there.
5 rem per year is 50mSv/year, which is actually kinda high. MSL reads 234mSv/year on the Martian surface.
This capital will be deployed toward hardware, subsystem testing, fuel fabrication, manufacturing, and the infrastructure required to turn on a reactor and lay the foundation for even more progress to come. We believe that you cannot decouple the design and build phase into a linear process, they must be iterative. In 2026, we will conduct a low-power reactor demonstration, the Mark-0 at Idaho National Laboratory. This demo, born out of the opportunity created by Executive Order 14301: Reforming Nuclear Reactor Testing at the Department of Energy will validate the reactor physics and reactivity controls of our R1 design and establish the facility, tooling, and operations required for sustained and enduring testing. Perhaps, most important of all, we will rapidly build institutional expertise with Department of Energy’s DOE-1271 standard for authorization, which will enable us to move faster with more schedule certainty on future test campaigns. After we successfully complete Mark-0 operation, we will have a clear pathway to our next major milestone: building a full power, electricity-producing reactor as early as 2027, using the same facility in Idaho. In 2026, we will transition from reactor physics tests to qualifying the full suite of reactor subsystems and constructing our first commercial prototype microreactor—the Mark-1. [...]The capital raised today positions us to compete in several sector-defining federal programs across the Department of the Army, NASA, and other federal agencies. [...]NASA has also announced its Fission Surface Power program, which aims to land a 100-kWe reactor on the lunar surface by 2030.
You are invited to review and comment on the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Glenn Research Center (GRC) Fission Surface Power (FSP) System Second Draft Announcement for Partnership Proposals (AFPP). Please see the attached Draft Announcement for Partnership Proposal (AFPP), and supporting attachments/documentation, for Announcement No. 80GRC025FSPS, Fission Surface Power (FSP) System.
This National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA/Glenn Research Center (GRC)) is establishing the Technical Library for all potential offerors to the Fission Surface Power (FSP) System Announcment for Partnership Proposals (AFPP)
Quote from: The Conference Report page 57Fission Surface Power (FSP).-The agreement provides $250,000,000 for FSP. The agreement directs NASA to brief the Committees semi-annually on NASA's plans to advance this critical technology, including work with the Department of Energy, American universities, and the private sector to ensure that the ESDMD is leveraging all available sources of knowledge and expertise to meet NASA's ambitious timeline for FSP maturation and deployment. The first such briefing shall be provided not less than 180 days after enactment of this act.
Fission Surface Power (FSP).-The agreement provides $250,000,000 for FSP. The agreement directs NASA to brief the Committees semi-annually on NASA's plans to advance this critical technology, including work with the Department of Energy, American universities, and the private sector to ensure that the ESDMD is leveraging all available sources of knowledge and expertise to meet NASA's ambitious timeline for FSP maturation and deployment. The first such briefing shall be provided not less than 180 days after enactment of this act.
NASA, along with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), announced Tuesday a renewed commitment to their longstanding partnership to support the research and development of a fission surface power system for use on the Moon under the Artemis campaign and future NASA missions to Mars.A recently signed memorandum of understanding between the agencies solidifies this collaboration and advances President Trump’s vision of American space superiority by deploying nuclear reactors on the Moon and in orbit, including the development of a lunar surface reactor by 2030. This effort ensures the United States leads the world in space exploration, security, and commerce. “Under President Trump’s national space policy, America is committed to returning to the Moon, building the infrastructure to stay, and making the investments required for the next giant leap to Mars and beyond,” said NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman. “Achieving this future requires harnessing nuclear power. This agreement enables closer collaboration between NASA and the Department of Energy to deliver the capabilities necessary to usher in the Golden Age of space exploration and discovery.”NASA and DOE anticipate deploying a fission surface power system capable of producing safe, efficient, and plentiful electrical power that will be able to operate for years without the need to refuel. The deployment of a lunar surface reactor will enable future sustained lunar missions by providing continuous and abundant power, regardless of sunlight or temperature.“History shows that when American science and innovation come together, from the Manhattan Project to the Apollo Mission, our nation leads the world to reach new frontiers once thought impossible,” said U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright. “This agreement continues that legacy. Thanks to President Trump’s leadership and his America First Space Policy, the department is proud to work with NASA and the commercial space industry on what will be one of the greatest technical achievements in the history of nuclear energy and space exploration.” The agencies’ joint effort to develop, fuel, authorize, and ready a lunar surface reactor for launch builds upon more than 50 years of successful collaboration in support of space exploration, technology development, and the strengthening of our national security.
NASA@NASAWe have news! We're partnering with @ENERGY to get a lunar nuclear reactor ready by 2030. Continuous, reliable power means we stay, build infrastructure, and push to Mars.We are following through on the President's directive in the national space policy through American leadership in exploration, security, and a thriving space economy.History proves when we team up on big challenges, we win. @NASAAdmin & @SecretaryWright are doing just that. 🇺🇸
