Skip to content

ESDMD #0902: Scalable Mars Surface Power Generation

Multi-kWe power generation, with energy storage, for crewed Mars missions, robust to Martian temperatures, dust and limited sunlight (bin 5, rating 45 of 57). Mars surface solar flux is under 40% of the Moon's, and dust storms can last a month. NASA's long-duration surface power experience is limited to robotic missions under 1 kW, plus one brief ground test of a kW-scale fission system (KRUSTY, 2018). A Mars-only gap, in the Humans to Mars segment (Tech gaps spreadsheet, ESDMD #0902).

Quotations below are from row ESDMD #0902 of the tech gaps spreadsheet unless marked otherwise. ADD Rev C's Appendix D prints the same table for this gap, and it matches the row field for field (ADD Rev C, p. 245).

Description

"There is a need for scalable Mars surface power generation capabilities to provide electrical energy for the majority of large assets and crew safety-critical operations planned for initial crewed missions to Mars. Technology development is needed to ensure high reliability and power availability in the Martian environment, including during potential hazardous environmental events. Technologies developed for the Moon may be applicable but insufficient due to differences in surface conditions: Mars surface solar flux is <40% of the Moon and exacerbated by month-long dust storms."

Impacts and benefits: "Without gap closure, the impact is the inability to support more than minimal missions to the Martian surface. Inability to enable in-situ resource utilization described in objective MI-04."

Current state of the art

"NASA experience with long-duration Moon and Mars surface power is limited to <1 kW robotic missions (e.g., ALSEP, InSight, Curiosity). There has been one brief ground test of a kW-scale fission power system intended for space ("KRUSTY" in 2018)."

The same sentences appear in the lunar gap #0901.

Performance target

Mars: "Scalable multi-kWe-scale power generation (and energy storage, as applicable) capable of supporting crew safety and exploration activities in Mars temperatures, dust, and solar availability conditions."

Child gaps

  • 0902-01: Nuclear power generation for the Martian surface
  • 0902-02: Solar power generation for the Martian surface
  • 0902-03: Fuel cell power for the Martian surface
  • 0902-04: Energy storage to enable robust and long-duration operations on Mars

Traceability

  • Use cases and functions: UC-P-101 M -- All FN; UC-P-102 M -- All FN; UC-P-103 M; UC-P-501 M
  • Definition tasks: Mars: ✓MD-07 Primary Mars Surface Power Generation Technology

The ✓ is printed in the sheet. The ADD's gap tables say "“✓” indicates completed definition task" (ADD Rev C, p. 204), and Section 3.1.3 lists MD-07 among the completed key definition tasks (p. 75; Key definition tasks).

Has the technology been chosen? The sources put this differently, so they are given side by side:

  • The 2024 white paper that records the decision, "Mars Surface Power Technology Decision", limits its scope. Fission "establishes the primary power generation technology for the Humans to Mars architecture segment but does not dictate funding for technology development or restrict other power technologies that could operate on the Martian surface", and "the potential for supplementary, backup, and redundant systems remains an open area of architectural analysis" (2024 white paper, p. 1). It traded solar and fuel cells and found that fuel cells "do not trade well" (p. 3). Details: Key definition tasks.
  • The spreadsheet (Dec 2025) still lists nuclear, solar and fuel-cell generation as separate child gaps, and its target names no technology. It marks the definition task "MD-07 Primary Mars Surface Power Generation Technology" with a ✓. ADD Rev C's own table for this gap prints the same four child gaps beside the same ticked MD-07 (ADD Rev C, p. 245, PDF checked).
  • ADD Rev C (Dec 2025, the same month) says the Lunar Nuclear Fission System responds "to NASA's selection of nuclear fission as the primary surface power generation technology for initial human Mars missions" (ADD Rev C, p. 58). It dates the decision: "At the 2024 Architecture Concept Review, the agency selected nuclear power technology (specifically, fission power) over non-nuclear power technology (in particular, photovoltaic arrays with energy storage) as the primary surface power generation technology for the initial human Mars missions" (MD-07, p. 75).
  • The "Architecture Definition" white paper (Dec 2025) makes MD-07 its case study. The task "examined a range of power sources, including solar power, nuclear fission power, and other sources (e.g., geothermal power, fuel cells)", weighing "mass, power output, safety, suitability to the Martian environment, and other factors", and "ultimately decided upon nuclear fission power, which offered the best balance across these factors". Its Table One shades MD-07 as closed (white paper, p. 5; Key definition tasks).
  • The Users Guide (Apr 2026) says "NASA has already selected nuclear fission as primary power generation technology" for Mars, "for its robustness to the planet's environment (i.e., to dust storms)" (Users Guide, p. 14).

So the selection was made at the 2024 Architecture Concept Review and restated in December 2025, while the same month's spreadsheet, and the ADD's own gap table, still carry solar and fuel-cell child gaps. The ✓ on MD-07 marks the definition task as completed. The 2024 paper's scope note is relevant, since it leaves room for other technologies, but no source says that is why the non-nuclear child gaps remain (open questions, item 12).

Solar flux, two baselines. The gap says Mars surface solar flux is "<40% of the Moon"; the 2024 paper says it "is at most 45 percent of typical Earth values" (p. 2). The two are measured against different references, so the wiki doesn't compare them.

Segments and sub-architectures

Priority

Priority bin 5, overall prioritization rating 45 of 57. Its lunar counterpart, #0901, is rated 13. The rating is "the gap's location in the prioritized list of gaps", so 1 is the highest priority, and bins group gaps of similar priority, bin 1 highest. Criticality, urgency, breadth and depth set the order; cost is not considered (ADD Rev C, pp. 78, 199; method on the gaps index).

Moon Base relevance

Not established by the sources so far. The gap is Mars-only in the spreadsheet, and the Users Guide does not name it among its near-term Moon Base challenges (Technology and knowledge challenges). The Users Guide's Mars-forward area "Nuclear technologies" links Moon Base and Mars power, without citing this gap: "Developing Moon Base nuclear power systems empower Mars exploration" (Users Guide, p. 14; see Mars-forward).

Sources

Tech gaps spreadsheet, ESDMD #0902 · Users Guide, p. 14 · ADD Rev C, pp. 58, 75, 78, 199, 204, 245 · "Architecture Definition" white paper, p. 5 · Mars Surface Power Technology Decision (2024), pp. 1–3