Beyond Toxicity

From Hydrazine to Green

1 April 2025

Every year, several thousand kilograms of a highly toxic and carcinogenic substance is launched into space. This substance is Hydrazine, the legacy propellant that has powered rockets & spacecraft for decades. While it has served the space industry well, its drawbacks have become increasingly unavoidable, driving the urgent need for better alternatives and the need for a “green” propellant, a necessity.

Escaping the Shadows of Hydrazine

Hydrazine has fueled the dreams of space exploration since the Apollo era, thrusting satellites, probes, lunar landers, and deep space exploration missions. It’s old, reliable, the grizzled veteran of propulsion—until you peek behind the curtain. Behind its steady performance lies a darker story: a toxic legacy that’s becoming impossible to sustain as the overall space industry rockets toward a $1.8 trillion future.

1. Dealing with Liquid Death

Working with hydrazine is already a roll of the dice—its toxicity (0.01 ppm limit) turns every move into a potential disaster. Imagine prepping a satellite for launch and suddenly, a valve leaks—just a few drops of hydrazine hit the floor. Alarms scream, the room clears, and SCAPE-suited figures—looking like astronauts lost on Earth—rush in to tame the beast. Why the chaos? A whiff of hydrazine can burn lungs or worse, kill.

One might describe it as: handling liquid death; you don’t see it, but it sees you.

Every fueling operation with Hydrazine is high stakes, layering risk and complexity atop an already intricate process. Whereas, green propulsion lets technicians ditch the suits and breathe easily, literally.

2. The Price of Playing with Poison

Fueling a big satellite with hydrazine can hit $1 million—those hazmat suits and sealed bunkers don’t come cheap. Even small satellites buzzing up there, cost $50K-$200K each to fuel safely. In 2023, hydrazine powered 100-150+ satellites, about 5%, out of the 2,300+ launches, costing us north of $10 million to fuel with all the hazmat gear and precautions. SOLUTION: GO GREEN; it cuts that to less than $4 million, saving more than $5-10 million a year.

3. Historic Shift

There’s no doubt that Hydrazine’s track record is legendary. It powered NASA’s Apollo lunar orbiters, ESA’s Rosetta comet-chaser, and ISRO’s Chandrayaan-1 to the Moon. But the giants who once relied on it are turning the page. NASA’s Green Propellant Infusion Mission (GPIM) in 2019 ditched hydrazine for a safer blend, proving it works in orbit. ESA’s aiming for a hydrazine-free fleet by 2030 under its Clean Space initiative, while Japan’s JAXA is testing electric propulsion for its next-gen satellites. The trend is clear: the industry that conquered the heavens with hydrazine is now racing to leave it behind.

4. Rising Demands:

Hydrazine has earned its stripes with a solid benchmark that’s reliably powered satellites and probes for decades. Yet, as the space industry evolves, missions are stretching beyond what hydrazine was built to handle. In today’s day and age, we need propulsion systems that can maximize mission efficiency, offer higher specific impulse, and adapt to the growing demands. It’s not that hydrazine’s failing; it’s that tomorrow’s missions are asking for more.

Also, with the space industry projected to launch over 20,000 satellites by 2030, we can’t afford to cling to a propellant that’s expensive and cumbersome to handle.

Enter the Green Way!

Green propulsion isn’t a newcomer—it’s a revolution with roots stretching back to the 1990s, when NASA first tested non-toxic alternatives to hydrazine amid growing safety and environmental concerns. The real spark? The 2019 Green Propellant Infusion Mission (GPIM), which flew a safer propellant into orbit, proved green tech could rival legacy systems. Today, it’s a lifeline for an industry scaling up—think constellations, deep space, and sustainability demands. At Bellatrix Aerospace, we’re pushing this frontier with two game-changing approaches:

1. Advanced Chemical “Green” Propellants: Meet hydroxylammonium nitrate (HAN)-based blends like BHM01A(Bellatrix), AF-M315E(AFRL)—non-toxic powerhouses delivering specific impulses up to 260 seconds, a 10-15% edge over hydrazine’s 220-230 seconds. Safer to handle, they pack the punch missions need without the hazard suits.

2. Electric Propulsion Systems: Hall effect thrusters, powered by solar electricity, hit specific impulses of 1,500-3,000 seconds using inert gases like Xenon and Krypton. These quiet giants trade brute force for efficiency, perfect for long-haul orbits or deep space treks.

To Clean Lift-Offs

Hydrazine’s chokehold is slipping. In 2023, only <10% of satellites were hydrazine-powered compared to ~70% a decade ago. Yet even this dwindling fleet drained approximately ~$170 million. It powered spaceflight for decades, but its risks and expenses don’t fit today’s pace.

The shift to green propulsion is more than a response to hydrazine’s limitations—it’s a commitment to a smarter, more responsible, and more sustainable future.

So, what’s behind this new approach? How do the greener propulsion systems outpace the old guard? Stay tuned—next time, we’re cracking open the tech that’s rewriting the stars, and trust us, you won’t see it coming.

For media inquiries, please contact:

Email: info@bellatrix.aero