Expert Voices

The US is now at risk of losing to China in the race to send people back to the Moon’s surface

China and the U.S. both have big plans for the Moon, but there are a number of reasons why no country could actually claim ownership of any land there.
Who will be first to return humans to the lunar surface? (Image credit: 3dScultor/iStock via Getty Images)

This article was originally published at The Conversation. The publication contributed the article to Space.com's Expert Voices: Op-Ed & Insights.

Jacco van Loon is a reader in Astrophysics, Keele University.

Will the next human to walk on the Moon speak English or Mandarin? In all, 12 Americans landed on the lunar surface between 1969 and 1972. Now, both the US and China are preparing to send humans back there this decade.

However, the US lunar program is delayed, in part because the spacesuits and lunar-landing vehicle are not ready. Meanwhile, China has pledged to put astronauts on the Moon by 2030 – and it has a habit of sticking to timelines.

Just a few years ago, such a scenario would have seemed unlikely. But there now appears to be a realistic possibility that China could beat the US in a race that America, arguably, has defined. So who will return there first, and does it really matter?

Nasa’s Moon programme is called Artemis. The US has involved international and commercial partners to spread the cost. Nasa set out a plan to get American boots back on lunar soil over the course of three missions. In November 2022, NASA launched its Orion spacecraft on a loop around the Moon without humans aboard. This was the Artemis I mission.

Related: China plans to build moon base at the lunar south pole by 2035

Artemis II, scheduled for late 2025, is similar to Artemis I, but this time Orion will carry four astronauts. They will not land; this will be left for Artemis III. For this third mission, Nasa will send a man and the first woman to the lunar surface. Though as yet unnamed, one of them will be the first person of color on the Moon.

Artemis III astronauts are set to use SpaceX’s Starship vehicle to land on the Moon. (Image credit: NASA)

Artemis III was scheduled to launch this year, but the timescale has slipped several times. A review in December 2023 gave a one in three chance that Artemis III would not have launched by February 2028. The mission is currently slated to happen no earlier than September 2026.

Meanwhile, China’s space programme seems to be moving at speed, without significant failures or delays. In April 2024, Chinese space officials announced that the country was on track to put its astronauts on the Moon by 2030.

It’s an extraordinary trajectory for a country that launched its first astronaut in 2003. China has been operating space stations since 2011 and has been ticking off important, challenging firsts through its Chang’e lunar exploration programme.

These robotic missions returned samples from the surface, including from the lunar far side. They have tested technology that could be crucial for landing humans. The next mission will touch down at the lunar south pole, a region that attracts intense interest because of the presence of water ice in shadowed craters there.

This water could be used for life support by a lunar base and turned into rocket propellant. Making rocket propellant on the Moon would be cheaper than bringing it from Earth, making lunar exploration more affordable. It is for these reasons that Artemis III will land at the south pole. It’s also the planned location for US and Chinese-led bases.

On September 28 2024, China showed off a spacesuit, to be worn by its Moon walkers, or “selenauts”. The suit is designed to protect the wearer against extreme temperature variations and unfiltered solar radiation. It is lightweight and flexible. Is it a sign of China already overtaking the US in one aspect of the Moon race? The company manufacturing the Artemis Moon suit, Axiom Space, is currently having to modify several aspects of the reference design given to them by Nasa.

The lander that will carry US astronauts from lunar orbit to the surface is also delayed. In 2021, Elon Musk’s SpaceX was given the contract to build this vehicle. It is based on SpaceX’s Starship, which consists of a 50m-long spacecraft that launches on the most powerful rocket ever built.

On October 13 2024, Starship scored a successful fifth test flight. But several challenging steps are required before the Starship Human Landing System can carry astronauts down to the lunar surface. Starship cannot fly directly to the Moon. It must refuel in Earth orbit first (using other Starships that act as propellant “tankers”). SpaceX needs to demonstrate refueling and conduct a test landing on the Moon without crew before Artemis III can proceed.

In addition, during Artemis I, Orion’s heat shield suffered considerable damage as the spacecraft made the high-temperature return through Earth’s atmosphere. Nasa engineers have been working to find a remedy before the Artemis II mission.

Too complicated?

Some critics argue that Artemis is too complex, referring to the intricate way in which astronauts and Moon lander are brought together in lunar orbit, the large number of independently operating commercial partners and the number of Starship launches required. Depending who you ask, between four and 15 Starship flights are needed to complete the refueling for Artemis III.

Former Nasa administrator Michael Griffin has advocated a simpler strategy, broadly along the lines of how China expects to accomplish its lunar landing. His vision sees Nasa relying on traditional commercial partners such as Boeing, rather than relative “newbies” such as SpaceX.

However, simple is not necessarily better or cheaper. The Apollo program was simpler, but at almost three times the cost of Artemis. SpaceX has been more successful, and economical, than Boeing in sending crews to the International Space Station.

The Artemis I mission was broadly successful, but Orion’s heat shield suffered damage. (Image credit: NASA)

New technology is not developed through simple, tried approaches but in bold endeavors that push boundaries. The James Webb Space Telescope is highly complex, with its folded mirror and distant position in space, but it allows astronomers to peer into the depths of the universe as no other telescope can. Innovation is especially crucial bearing in mind future ambitions such as asteroid mining and a settlement on Mars.

Does it matter whether the first 21st-century selenauts are Chinese or American? This is largely a question about the relationship between governments and their citizens, and between nations.

Democratic governments depend on public support to safeguard funding for expensive, long-term ventures – and prestige is an important selling point. But prestige in a 21st-century Moon race will be earned by doing it well, not sooner. Rushing back to the Moon could be costly, both financially and in the risk to human life.

Governments must set an example of responsible behavior. Peace, inclusivity and sustainability should be guiding principles. Going back to the Moon must not be about dominion or superiority. It should be a chance to show that we can improve on how we have previously behaved on Earth.

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Jacco van Loon
Astronomer, Keele University
  • billslugg
    BTDT
    Reply
  • Classical Motion
    I see no risk.
    Reply
  • edison6017
    But why the US wants another Space Race with China after so called beating Russia in a "space race" . What is winning and loosing in Space ? Did USA beat Russia in Space in 60s by sending APOLLO crew to moon? If that is the case then why the US begged the Russian president for Space Shuttle missions to MIR. The fact of the matter is that Russia did not loose any Space Race and neither did USA . Both countries won in many areas of Space and DO NOT forget that Russia built her modular space station MIR alone . Russia's Soyuz crew vehicle was the only space vehicle for a long long time using which USA and many other countries used to send and return crew to and from ISS after the US Space Shuttle disaster and before the SpaceX dragon crew . China is also the only country after Russia who built the modular space station using all the indigenous technologies , whereas the ISS , although is huge but got constructed by a dozen countries . So STOP beating about this damn yet another Space Race and concentrate on ways using which all the powerful countries could cooperate in Space and REMOVE the WOLFE amendments.
    Reply
  • Meteoric Marmot
    edison6017 said:
    But why the US wants another Space Race with China after so called beating Russia in a "space race" . What is winning and loosing in Space ? Did USA beat Russia in Space in 60s by sending APOLLO crew to moon? If that is the case then why the US begged the Russian president for Space Shuttle missions to MIR. The fact of the matter is that Russia did not loose any Space Race and neither did USA . Both countries won in many areas of Space and DO NOT forget that Russia built her modular space station MIR alone . Russia's Soyuz crew vehicle was the only space vehicle for a long long time using which USA and many other countries used to send and return crew to and from ISS after the US Space Shuttle disaster and before the SpaceX dragon crew . China is also the only country after Russia who built the modular space station using all the indigenous technologies , whereas the ISS , although is huge but got constructed by a dozen countries . So STOP beating about this damn yet another Space Race and concentrate on ways using which all the powerful countries could cooperate in Space and REMOVE the WOLFE amendments.
    I would agree with you if it was yet another race to be the first there and nothing else, but that's not the case this time.

    Both nations are planning to build a base and just as with Earth real estate, it's all about "location, location, location." There is definitely a best place to build a base and the first one there gets to choose that spot.
    Reply
  • James Parker
    If the SpaceX lander is ready before Gateway is functional and Artemis III is ready, SpaceX could go direct to the Moon with their Starship stack, provided that it can be human-rated in time. Just pay Elon & he'll get it done.
    Reply
  • Outback_Joe
    You have got to be kidding right! We were already on the moon before most of China knew what a hot dog was! No reason to prove we can do it again! We can!
    Reply
  • edison6017
    Meteoric Marmot said:
    I would agree with you if it was yet another race to be the first there and nothing else, but that's not the case this time.

    Both nations are planning to build a base and just as with Earth real estate, it's all about "location, location, location." There is definitely a best place to build a base and the first one there gets to choose that spot.
    OK , so lets say there is a so called BEST place on the lunar surface and lets for the sake of argument that China built a base at the BEST location . Then can US not build another base 03 miles away from that base , 02 miles away from that base or 01 miles away from that base . Come one man , please try to understand that this is just a BS propaganda machine that the Pentagon and Military Industrial Complex are running against China and nothing else.
    Reply
  • billslugg
    There is no need to put humans on the Moon, period. Only when the limits of robotic research have been reached, which will never happen.
    Reply
  • Classical Motion
    Or if there is something we can loot.
    Reply
  • Rob77
    edison6017 said:
    OK , so lets say there is a so called BEST place on the lunar surface and lets for the sake of argument that China built a base at the BEST location . Then can US not build another base 03 miles away from that base , 02 miles away from that base or 01 miles away from that base . Come one man , please try to understand that this is just a BS propaganda machine that the Pentagon and Military Industrial Complex are running against China and nothing else.
    I understand what your saying and agree - but what will happen is the first to get to this "ideal location" will then place an exclusion zone for "science purposes". Any country that decides to ignore that and park itself too close will basically be declared an aggressor and starting a war. As stupid as this scenario sounds, that's the world we currently live in.
    Reply