Nuclear Power in Space Faces Infrastructure Bottlenecks, Industry Warns

ENGINEERING EXPERT DAVID SCHLEEPER CALLS FOR NEW TESTING FACILITIES, CLEAR REGULATIONS, AND SPACEPORT INFRASTRUCTURE TO ENABLE THE NEXT GENERATION OF NUCLEAR SPACE MISSIONS.

As the United States prepares for sustained lunar missions, deep space exploration, and increasingly complex orbital infrastructure, nuclear energy may become essential to powering the next era of space operations.

But according to David Schleeper of engineering firm RS&H, the biggest barrier to deploying nuclear systems in space is not technology—it is infrastructure.

Speaking at spaceNEXT 2026, Schleeper warned that the United States lacks the testing facilities, regulatory clarity, and launch-site capabilities necessary to support the emerging space nuclear power industry.

“There’s a gap right now between the nuclear community and the space community,” Schleeper said. “The space guys are really good at putting things into orbit. The nuclear guys are really good at building reactors. But there’s not much conversation happening between them.”

His presentation focused on what must be built on Earth to enable nuclear-powered systems in space—and why the timeline for action is quickly approaching.

Nuclear Power as the Backbone of Future Space Missions

Schleeper outlined several ambitious goals driving interest in nuclear power for space.

These include permanent operations on the Moon and Mars, faster transportation between planets, large orbital infrastructure such as data centers, and resilient power systems for national security satellites.

Traditional solar power systems may struggle to support these missions, particularly in environments where sunlight is limited.

Nuclear systems could provide a solution.

Radioisotope heaters could allow spacecraft and infrastructure to survive the two-week lunar night, while nuclear reactors could deliver continuous power on the Moon or Mars.

Nuclear propulsion technologies could also significantly reduce travel times for deep-space missions and increase payload capacity.

“We need faster travel times to the Moon and Mars,” Schleeper said. “And we need higher payload capability.”

Nuclear energy, he argued, could also support space-based power generation for orbital infrastructure, including future defense systems and data centers.

Testing Facilities Are a Major Bottleneck

Despite the potential benefits, Schleeper said the United States currently lacks the facilities needed to develop and test nuclear space systems.

Space reactors require higher uranium enrichment levels than typical commercial nuclear reactors, meaning they can only be tested at specialized locations.

Currently, only two facilities in the United States can support this type of testing: Idaho National Laboratory and Los Alamos National Laboratory, both operated by the Department of Energy.

Those facilities are already facing growing demand from the terrestrial nuclear industry.

“The result is a major choke point,” Schleeper said.

To address the issue, he proposed creating a dedicated space reactor test facility at a NASA site.

Such a facility would support systems with at least 150 kilowatts of electrical output, allow for testing under simulated space conditions such as vacuum environments, and include provisions for advanced coolants and other specialized technologies.

Demonstration Challenges for Large Nuclear Systems

Even after reactor testing, nuclear systems must undergo large-scale demonstrations before flight.

Unlike traditional spacecraft components, nuclear power systems must be integrated with landers, radiators, converters, and deployment hardware, creating large and complex assemblies.

Schleeper explained that a reactor producing 300 kilowatts of thermal power could require nearly 10,000 square feet of radiator surface area.

Testing systems of that scale requires massive vacuum chambers capable of simulating space conditions.

While NASA’s Glenn Research Center hosts the largest such chamber currently available, Schleeper said future missions may require even larger facilities.

The challenge becomes even more complex when considering nuclear thermal propulsion systems, which can reach temperatures of 3,000 Kelvin.

Testing these systems requires sophisticated exhaust scrubbing systems to prevent radioactive materials from entering the atmosphere—facilities that could cost more than $1 billion to build.

Some companies developing nuclear propulsion technologies are already considering an alternative approach.

“They’re telling me it might actually be cheaper to test these systems in space than to build the facility on Earth,” Schleeper said.

Spaceports Are Not Ready for Nuclear Payloads

Perhaps the most urgent infrastructure gap involves launch site integration.

Currently, no spaceport in the United States is licensed or equipped to handle nuclear fission payloads.

While the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility at Kennedy Space Center has supported missions carrying radioisotope power sources, fission reactors introduce additional safety and regulatory requirements.

Integrating a nuclear payload into a launch vehicle involves complex procedures and large operational teams to ensure safety.

Schleeper warned that upcoming missions could strain existing facilities.

Between 2027 and 2030, at least six nuclear-related missions are expected to launch.

Historically, missions using radioisotope generators can occupy integration facilities for up to six months.

“With six missions in four years, that means three years of facility time,” Schleeper explained. “Time is of the essence.”

Immediate Action Required

To meet these timelines, Schleeper argued that several steps must begin immediately.

First, NASA and industry should conduct a “fatal flaw analysis” of facilities at Cape Canaveral to determine what modifications are needed to support nuclear payload integration.

If upgrades are required, construction must begin quickly.

“If we’re here next year and no physical work has started at the Cape, we’ve got problems,” he said.

In the longer term, Schleeper recommended building a dedicated nuclear payload processing facility at Kennedy Space Center or Cape Canaveral.

He also called for clearer regulatory guidance.

Currently, nuclear space missions could fall under multiple regulatory frameworks, including those managed by NASA, the Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and other agencies.

“For industry, the biggest thing is clarity,” Schleeper said. “Just tell us what requirements we need to meet and we’ll meet them.”

A Race Against Time

With multiple nuclear-powered missions planned in the coming decade, Schleeper emphasized that the space industry must move quickly to develop the necessary infrastructure.

Without investment in testing facilities, integration sites, and regulatory frameworks, the United States risks slowing progress in a technology that could become central to future exploration and national security.

The opportunity is significant—but so is the urgency.

“The demand is coming,” Schleeper said. “We need to be ready.”