Integrated Lunar Power Strategy Considerations (ACR25 white paper)¶

Document: Integrated Lunar Power Strategy Considerations, a six-page white paper headed "2025 Moon to Mars Architecture" and footed "2025 Moon to Mars Architecture Concept Review". No date is printed. It is NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS) citation 20250010948. Files: text sources/text/docs/ntrs-20250010948-ACR25-WP-Lunar-Power-Strategy.txt; raw sources/raw/docs/ntrs-20250010948-ACR25-WP-Lunar-Power-Strategy.pdf (fetched 2026-10-01T07:22:47Z from https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20250010948/downloads/ACR25%20-%20WP%20-%20Lunar%20Power%20Strategy.pdf, per sources/manifest.csv). Page numbers: the printed page numbers (1–6) match the PDF pages and the text file's [page N] markers. All six pages were checked against the PDF.

Which paper this is. NASA's White Papers web page lists it under "2025 Architecture Concept Review", with the same title and the same NTRS link (White Papers page, fetched 2026-10-01). The 2025 Architecture Update (Dec 2025) lists it among the six 2025 white papers as "Integrated Lunar Power Considerations", covering "the key factors that affect generating, storing, and sharing power on the lunar surface" (Update, p. 17).

Summary. The considerations behind a lunar power strategy NASA has not yet published: "NASA plans to debut its full integrated lunar power strategy based on the considerations outlined in this paper in the coming years" (p. 5). Elements in the Human Lunar Return segment bring their own power. From the Foundational Exploration segment on, NASA "will implement external power augmentation" (p. 1). The paper sets out four architecture drivers, compares nuclear fission and solar generation, defines "effective energy storage duration", and weighs cabling against power beaming. It closes on the Moon as a testbed for Mars power.

The content is on Power Systems, with the fission-specific points on the Lunar Nuclear Fission System.

Contents¶

Page	Section	Wiki home
1	Introduction; Figure One, "A rendering of sunlight and shadow within 2 degrees of the lunar South Pole on January 1, 2030"	Power Systems
2	Environmental Considerations; Architecture Drivers: Multi-Region Support, Minimizing Mass; Figure Two ("Survive" and "Thrive")	same
3	Figure Three (power profile); Balancing Complexity; Lunar Segment Extensibility; Technological Considerations; Power Generation Technologies	same
4	Nuclear and solar compared (table); Nuclear Fission Power; Solar Power; Energy Storage Technologies, with the definition of effective energy storage duration; Figure Four	same; fission element
5	Energy storage (end); Power Transfer Technologies; Mars-Forward Considerations; Conclusion	same; fission element
6	Key Takeaways; references 1–4	this page

What the PDF shows that the text layer loses¶

p. 2's two columns are interleaved in the text layer. The heading "Minimizing Mass" comes before "Multi-Region Support", and one sentence is split in two: "No single site on the Moon will enable NASA to accomplish all its lunar exploration objectives; the lunar power grid must be extensible to multiple sites in the lunar South Pole region and beyond." The PDF reads normally: Multi-Region Support, then Minimizing Mass.
Figure Two (p. 2) has two panels, "SURVIVE" and "THRIVE". A key marks blocks for "Payload Mass", "Battery Mass" and "Power System Mass", and bars for "Power" and "Range". In "Survive", three landers and a rover each carry their own battery and power-system blocks. In "Thrive", the same assets are cabled to a shared battery and to a unit labeled "External Power Augmentation", and carry more payload blocks. The caption gives the meaning: assets "can rely on the power grid to meet their needs, increasing mass available for payloads and improving the range of mobility assets".
Figure Three (p. 3), "Foundational Exploration Segment Power Profile", has no text in the text layer beyond its caption. It plots "cumulative power in kW" (axis 0 to 30) against "lunar surface power users" (axis 0 to 12), with six series: "Day Power Needed", "Day Power Available (without augmentation)", "Day Power Gap", "Night Power Needed", "Night Power Available (without augmentation)" and "Night Power Gap". It is marked "Values Notional". The wiki reads no values off it.
The p. 4 table extracts in order and is reproduced on Power Systems.
Figure Four (p. 4) is a bar across "Lunar Summer" and "Lunar Winter", with blocks of "Solar Illumination" and "Period of Darkness". Two spans are marked: a longer "Effective Energy Storage Need" and a shorter "Maximum Period of Continuous Darkness". The caption says it is "For illustrative purposes only; not meant to show actual illumination considerations at a proposed exploration site."
p. 5's columns are interleaved too. The Mars-Forward Considerations section starts at the foot of the left column and ends at the top of the right: "In 2024, NASA identified nuclear fission as the primary surface power generation source for initial human missions to Mars. The agency selected the technology based on its robustness to the Martian environment and a host of other considerations outlined in a 2024 architecture white paper." The text layer separates the last clause from its sentence.

Key takeaways (p. 6)¶

"NASA is performing trade space analyses to support the development of an integrated lunar power strategy. That strategy will address critical environmental, technological, architectural, and Mars-forward considerations."
"The environment at the Moon and our scientific objectives present new challenges for power generation and distribution."
"An integrated lunar power strategy must consider the long-term needs of lunar exploration; these architectural considerations include minimizing delivered mass, balancing complexity and risk, and assuring extensibility to later lunar exploration campaign segments."
"The technological trade space includes variety of power generation, energy storage, and power transfer systems and capabilities. Each has benefits and drawbacks that must be weighed against one another and analyzed in the broader context of the architecture."
"The Moon offers unique opportunities to test power technologies and operational concepts that inform missions to the Red Planet. NASA's integrated lunar power strategy will consider the value of Mars-forward research and development on the lunar surface."
"NASA is developing its lunar power strategy based on these considerations and is initiating new power elements into the architecture that meet architecture needs and close capability gaps."

Compared with ADD Rev C¶

This comparison is the wiki's:

The same split by segment. The ADD's Power Systems description says that "Initially, the architecture presumes that each element and exploration asset can provide the power and energy storage needed", and later expands to "internal augmentation, external augmentation, and/or a lunar power grid" (ADD Rev C, p. 44). The paper puts the change at the Foundational Exploration segment (p. 1).
A completed definition task on the same subject. The ADD lists LD-101, "Lunar External Power Augmentation", as completed: "The agency will pursue power augmentation trades that balance element design, aggregate power demand, total surface landed mass, mission-to-mission flexibility, and architecture robustness" (ADD Rev C, p. 75). The paper discusses the same trades but never names LD-101 or any definition task (search of its text). See Key definition tasks.
No element named. The paper never mentions the Lunar Nuclear Fission System, which the ADD says NASA "added" in 2025 (ADD Rev C, p. 58). It says instead that NASA "will initiate an integrated surface power element into the architecture to realize functional capabilities for external power augmentation" (p. 5), and that NASA "is initiating new power elements" (p. 6). Whether these are the fission system is not stated (open question 32).
No technology gap named. The paper says "NASA must understand where capability gaps exist for enabling systems" (p. 3) but cites no gap. The subjects overlap with #0901 (generation and storage), #0903 (distribution) and #0301 (extended shadow); the pairing is the wiki's.

References¶

As printed (p. 6):

Ref.	Title, as printed	Among the wiki's sources?
1	Why Artemis Will Focus on the Lunar South Pole Region, 2022 Moon to Mars Architecture White Paper	no
2	NASA's Moon to Mars Architecture Website	yes, source page
3	Mars Surface Power Technology Decision, 2024 Moon to Mars Architecture White Paper	yes, source page
4	NASA's Moon to Mars Objectives	yes, Moon to Mars Objectives (2022) (same URL)

"No" means no file in sources/manifest.csv or sources/text/pages/ has a matching name; the check is the wiki's (open question 30).

Oddities¶

Segment of the LTV and Pressurized Rover. "During the Human Lunar Return segment, the architecture relies on self-sufficient elements … — such as the Human Landing System, Lunar Terrain Vehicle, Pressurized Rover" (p. 1). ADD Rev C maps the LTV and the Pressurized Rover to Foundational Exploration only; its Human Lunar Return table (p. 26) has the HLS but neither rover (Human Lunar Return; open question 33).
The drivers, listed three ways. The section's opening lists "supporting multiple regions, minimizing delivered mass, balancing performance and risk, and assuring extensibility to later lunar and Mars exploration campaign segments" (p. 2). The headings are "Multi-Region Support", "Minimizing Mass", "Balancing Complexity" and "Lunar Segment Extensibility" (pp. 2–3). The takeaways list three: "minimizing delivered mass, balancing complexity and risk, and assuring extensibility to later lunar exploration campaign segments" (p. 6), without multi-region support and without Mars.
Title. The Update calls it "Integrated Lunar Power Considerations" (p. 17); the paper and the White Papers page say "Integrated Lunar Power Strategy Considerations".
Mars light-time delay. "the one-way light-time communications delay can range from 4 to 24 minutes" (p. 5, PDF checked), as in the "Why Moon and Mars?" paper. The Update says "up to 22 minutes" (open question 31).
A dated announcement. "In August of 2025, acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy announced plans to develop a nuclear power system for the lunar surface. This directive helps to address the power considerations addressed in this paper and leverages prior technology investments and architecture integration studies" (p. 5). The paper doesn't name the system. The wiki doesn't tie it to Lunar Reactor-1, which a later NASA page announces for 2030 (fission element).
As printed: "includes variety of power generation" (p. 6); "would avoid duplicative work and maximizes the return" (p. 5).

Power Systems · Lunar Nuclear Fission System · #0901 · #0903 · #0301 · Key definition tasks · 2025 Architecture Update · ADD Rev C