Ghana’s defence and environment ministers are among eight killed when a military helicopter crashed, the government has said.

The West African country’s military said the helicopter took off in the morning from the capital Accra and was heading northwest into the interior to the town of Obuasi when it went off the radar.

Footage of the crash site shows debris on fire in a forest as people circle around to help.

The cause of the crash was not immediately known. The military said an investigation was under way.

Defence minister Edward Omane Boamah and environment minister Ibrahim Murtala Muhammed were killed, along with the vice-chair of the National Democratic Congress ruling party, a top national security adviser and the helicopter’s three crew members.

Read more from Sky News:
Birmingham Airport runway shut after ‘aircraft incident’
Five soldiers injured in shooting at US Army base

State media said the aircraft was a Z-9 helicopter, which is often used for transport and medical evacuation.

It was one of the worst air disasters in Ghana in more than a decade.

A service helicopter crashed off the coast in May 2014 and killed at least three people.

And in 2012 a cargo plane overran the runway in Accra and crashed into a bus full of passengers, killing at least 10 people.

NASA is accelerating plans to put a nuclear reactor on the moon, and they claim it could happen by 2030.

In a directive – a written or oral instruction issued by the US government – to NASA staff earlier this month, Sean Duffy, US transport secretary and the new interim administrator of the space agency, said it should be ready to launch a 100 kilowatt nuclear reactor in five years.

Plans to get a reactor on the lunar surface are not new. The NASA website states the space agency is working on the Fission Surface Power Project to create a system capable of generating at least 40 kilowatts of power – but that is less than half of what Mr Duffy has now proposed.

He also stressed the importance of America’s space agency deploying the technology before China and Russia.

“To properly advance this critical technology, to be able to support a future lunar economy, high power energy generation on Mars, and to strengthen our national security in space, it is imperative the agency move quickly,” the directive, which was first reported on by Politico, states.

A nuclear reactor on the moon would be considered a key step towards building a permanent base for humans to live on the lunar surface.

But Mr Duffy warned that the first country to deploy a reactor “could potentially declare a keep-out zone” which he said could significantly inhibit NASA’s Artemis mission – the lunar exploration programme which aims to land astronauts back on the moon in 2027.

When quizzed about the plan on 5 August, he told reporters: “We’re in a race to the moon, in a race with China to the moon. And to have a base on the moon, we need energy.”

Why use a nuclear reactor?

Unlike solar power, which is used on the International Space Station, a small nuclear reactor can operate continuously, Dr Sungwoo Lim, a senior lecturer in space applications, exploration and instrumentation at the University of Surrey told Sky News.

This is critical for infrastructure on the moon, which spends two weeks in complete darkness as it slowly orbits the Earth.

Nuclear reactors therefore diminish the need for sunlight, and can be used to power life support, communications and other critical science instruments, even in darkness.

“In practice, this means astronauts could use a reactor to establish sustainable bases and extend exploration to places where solar energy is impractical,” Dr Lim adds, including in the moon’s permanently shadowed region, where scientists believe ice water exists.

Professor Mike Fitzpatrick, an expert in nuclear technology at Coventry University, adds that the proposal of a 100 kilowatt nuclear reactor, is relatively small compared to most that are built on Earth.

To put it in real terms, it takes around three kilowatts to power the kettle in your home.

But Prof Fitzpatrick says a smaller reactor could pose as “demonstrator technology”, something small and compact that makes it easier to transport it to the moon.

“Then you can have a whole array of them,” he says.

So, what’s the catch?

While scientists agree that nuclear energy seems like the necessary way to make progress on the moon, Prof Fitzpatrick says questions still remain about safety.

“Shipping the fuel to the moon is relatively safe, because at that point it is not particularly toxic, it is the highly reactive fission products that become the issue,” he says.

“What’s going to be the strategy for long-term storage and disposal on the moon after these plants have operated for certain periods of time? The sooner those conversations are had, and you have international consensus, the less likely it is you’ll get future friction.”

Dr Lim also questioned Mr Duffy’s timescale of 2030, saying meeting the target depends heavily on the space agency’s budget.

NASA’s future funding is currently unknown after Donald Trump’s 2026 budget request sought a cut of $6bn (£4.5bn) and the termination of dozens of science programs and missions.

Over 2,000 agency employees are also set to voluntarily leave NASA in the coming months under the Trump administration’s “deferred resignation” programme.

Is this the new space race?

Last year, Russia’s space agency Roscosmos said it was planning to build a lunar nuclear reactor alongside China’s National Space Administration by 2035, in order to power the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS).

The collaboration was never formally announced by China but the joint plan was included in a presentation by Chinese officials in April this year, which outlined the 2028 Chang’e-8 lunar mission which aims to lay the groundwork for the ILRS.

“Duffy explicitly described it as a competition,” says Dr Lim, adding that the move towards lunar exploration signals a renewed moon or space race among major parties like China, Russia, India and the US to claim strategic lunar territory and technology.

Read more:
Permission granted for first-of-its-kind British rocket launch
Astronauts arrive at International Space Station

Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

However, Rossana Deplano a professor of international space law at the University of Leicester, says there is a lot of misunderstanding around “keep out” or safety zones, which Mr Duffy’s directive mentions.

“Safety zones are explicitly recognised in the Artemis Accords,” she says.

“They are a notification and consultation zone to be declared in advance in order to avoid harmful interference.

“They must be temporary in nature and do not establish state jurisdiction, e.g. they cannot be enforced.”

Escalating Israel’s military operation in Gaza to the max – which is reportedly what Israel’s prime minister is leaning towards – will stretch an already exhausted army.

No wonder Eyal Zamir, Israel‘s chief of staff, is reportedly reluctant to go down that route, however much of the messaging from the top has been that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) will follow whatever the political echelon decides.

No wonder, then, that IDF spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani was reluctant to flesh out the implications of an expanded operation or what a full military “occupation” – touted now as having entered Benjamin Netanyahu‘s lexicon – will look like.

As he pointed out, Hamas benefits from international outrage over the spectre of famine in Gaza.

It turns the tide of public opinion against Israel, taking the pressure off Hamas. That may be, in part, why the latest round of ceasefire talks collapsed.

The IDF refuses to accept responsibility for Gaza being on the brink of famine, instead accusing the UN of failing to do their part in an ongoing war of words, although Lt Col Shoshani acknowledged that distributing aid in a war zone is “not simple”.

That is why it should have been left to experts in humanitarian aid distribution – the UN and its agencies, not to US military contractors.

Given the large number of aid-related deaths reported daily, not just by Gaza’s health ministry but also by doctors who are treating the injured and tying up the body bags, there should be greater accountability.

Lt Col Shoshani said the missing link is the proof that it is IDF soldiers doing the shooting. He is right.

If international journalists were granted access to Gaza, to support Palestinian colleagues whose every day involves both the danger of operating in a war zone and the search for food and supplies for their families, then there might be greater accountability.

Read more about Gaza:
Full Israeli occupation of Gaza could massively backfire
Row over checks for Gazans who’ve earned places at UK unis
Sky News unveils pattern of deadly Israeli attacks on families

Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

It is not sufficient to claim that the IDF operates “in accordance with our values, with our procedures and with international law”, which is what Lt Col Shoshani told Sky News.

That may suffice for Israeli audiences who see very little on their screens of the reality on the ground, but it is not enough for the rest of us – not after 61,000 deaths.

If the IDF has nothing to hide, it should allow international journalists in.

That would alleviate the burden of reporting on Palestinian journalists, at least 175 of whom have lost their lives since the war began.

It would also allow a degree more clarity on what is happening and who is to blame for the hell inside Gaza now.