[sp332]

Sure but can you refuel with more hydrazine on the Moon? With this new engine, just purify some water and you have more propellant ready to go.

Also, is hydrazine so efficient below 30 watts?

[kanox]

> Sure but can you refuel with more hydrazine on the Moon?

Water might be present on the moon in always-shadowed craters and it is not 100% proven. Those same craters might also contain other volatiles that could maybe be used to synthesize hydrazine or methane.

If water is found on the moon it could definitely be used to produce hydrolox which has amazing isp, ~450.

> Also, is hydrazine so efficient below 30 watts?

Hydrazine monopropellant is decomposed with a catalyst, it doesn't need external power.

If you need an external power source then you're competing against various ion thrusters which can get 10x the Isp. Maybe it's main advantage is extremely small size, or perhaps it gets higher thrust?

[CarVac]

I was referring to the use for GTO-GSO orbit raising, where it's less mass efficient than both hydrazine and ion engine propulsion.

But the Isp might be so low only because of scaling issues on a device that has to fit in a microsatellite.

If they do meet their target of 900 second specific impulse on the larger models, then it might indeed be very useful.

[vpribish]

hydrazine works at approximately 0 watts. other than opening a valve it's all chemistry.

[sp332]

I think that part of the article was talking about low-thrust applications, not actual electricity usage.