On that tangent, there's been a large amount of R&D into finding alternative monopropellants, because this one's so infamously hazardous to work with. https://

On that tangent, there's been a large amount of R&D into finding alternative monopropellants, because this one's so infamously hazardous to work with. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Propellant_Infusion_Mission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Propellant_Infusion_Miss... - "When compared to the present high-thrust and high-performance industry standard for orbital maneuvering systems, which for decades, have exclusively been reliant upon toxic hydrazine based propellant formulations, the "greener" hydroxylammonium nitrate (HAN) monopropellant offers many advantages..." And: Starlink eschews chemical thrusters entirely, and only flies with electric Hall-effect thrusters (harmless krypton or argon gas). Might be an underappreciated engineering choice: no hazmats at integration should simplify a lot of things for them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Satellite_hardware https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Satellite_hardware