Argon in Electric and Plasma Thrusters: A Deep Dive Into Propellant Selection for Next‑Gen Space Propulsion

In the quest to push humanity farther into the solar system, engineers have increasingly turned to electric and plasma thrusters—propulsion systems that swap the brute force of chemical reactions for the precise, efficient acceleration of charged particles. Central to the performance of these thrusters is the choice of propellant. Among the candidates, argon has emerged as a standout option, offering a combination of low cost, high availability, and favorable physical properties. This article explores why argon is gaining traction in electric and plasma thrusters, how it compares to traditional propellants like xenon, and what the future holds for argon-based space propulsion.

Understanding Electric and Plasma Thrusters

Electric and plasma thrusters are a class of propulsion devices that use electrical energy—rather than chemical combustion—to accelerate a propellant to high exhaust velocities. This fundamental difference allows them to achieve a specific impulse (Isp) several times higher than that of chemical rockets, meaning they can produce more thrust per unit of propellant. While thrust levels are generally lower, the high efficiency makes these thrusters ideal for long-duration missions such as station‑keeping, orbit raising, and deep‑space exploration.

Several subtypes exist, each with its own mechanism for generating thrust:

  • Ion thrusters: These devices ionize a propellant gas (typically xenon or argon) in a discharge chamber, then accelerate the resulting ions through a set of high‑voltage grids. The expelled ion beam produces thrust. NASA’s NEXT (NASA Evolutionary Xenon Thruster) and the Deep Space 1 mission are classic examples.
  • Hall effect thrusters: In this design, a magnetic field traps electrons, creating a plasma that ionizes incoming propellant. The ions are then accelerated by an electric field perpendicular to the magnetic field. Hall thrusters are widely used for satellite station‑keeping and have been adapted for use with argon.
  • Magnetoplasmadynamic (MPD) thrusters: These use a high‑current arc to ionize and electromagnetically accelerate propellant. They can handle higher power levels and are being studied for crewed interplanetary missions.
  • Pulsed plasma thrusters (PPTs): PPTs create a pulsed discharge across a solid propellant (often Teflon), ablate and ionize it, and then accelerate the plasma. They are simple and reliable but have lower efficiency; research into using gaseous argon instead of solid propellant is ongoing.

All of these systems produce thrust by accelerating charged particles to velocities of 10–50 km/s (compared to around 4.5 km/s for chemical rockets). The choice of propellant dramatically influences thruster performance, lifespan, and mission cost.

Why Argon? The Propellant Properties That Matter

Argon (Ar) is a noble gas—colorless, odorless, and chemically inert. While xenon has long been the propellant of choice for electric thrusters, argon offers a set of attributes that make it increasingly attractive, especially for large‑scale or cost‑sensitive missions.

Abundance and Cost

Xenon is rare, comprising only about 0.0000087% of Earth’s atmosphere, and its extraction is expensive—costing roughly $2,000–$5,000 per kilogram. Argon, on the other hand, makes up nearly 1% of the atmosphere and can be produced as a byproduct of air separation at a fraction of the cost (around $10–$50 per kilogram). For missions requiring many tons of propellant—such as tugs for cislunar logistics or crewed Mars vehicles—the cost advantage of argon is enormous.

Ionization and Atomic Mass

Argon has a first ionization potential of 15.76 eV, slightly higher than xenon (12.13 eV). While this means slightly more energy is required to create an ion, argon’s lower atomic mass (39.95 u vs. 131.29 u for xenon) has an interesting effect: for a given kinetic energy, argon ions exit the thruster with a higher velocity. This can translate into higher specific impulse if the thruster can be designed to operate efficiently at these higher exhaust speeds.

Further, argon’s lighter mass reduces the mass flow rate required for a given thrust level, which can ease propellant storage and feed system demands.

Inertness and Storage

As a noble gas, argon does not react with thruster materials—meaning chamber walls, grids, and other components suffer less chemical erosion. This inertness is a significant advantage over some alternative propellants like krypton or bismuth, which can be chemically aggressive at high temperatures. Additionally, argon can be stored as a high‑pressure gas or in cryogenic liquid form at moderate temperatures, offering flexibility in tank design.

Environmental and Safety Considerations

Argon is non‑toxic, non‑flammable, and does not deplete the ozone layer. Handling and transportation are straightforward, unlike hydrazine or other chemical propellants that require strict safety protocols. This simplifies ground operations and reduces mission risk.

Advantages of Argon in Electric Thrusters

The combination of argon’s properties yields several concrete benefits for spacecraft propulsion.

Increased Specific Impulse

Because argon atoms are lighter than xenon atoms, they can be accelerated to higher velocities for the same applied voltage. Many argon‑based thrusters achieve Isp values in the range of 3,000–5,000 s, compared to 2,000–3,500 s for xenon thrusters. This means that a spacecraft can accomplish the same total impulse—a measure of total momentum change—with significantly less propellant mass, which directly reduces launch costs and enables more ambitious maneuvering budgets.

Reduced Grid and Component Erosion

In ion thrusters, the acceleration grids are bombarded by high‑energy ions. Xenon ions, because of their high mass, cause more sputtering—eroding the grid material over time. Argon ions, being lighter, transfer less momentum during collisions, resulting in reduced erosion rates. This can extend thruster lifetime from tens of thousands of hours to potentially over 100,000 hours, a critical factor for multi‑year interplanetary missions.

Cost‑Effectiveness and Scalability

For large constellations of satellites or heavy‑lift electric propulsion stages, the propellant cost becomes a major program driver. Argon’s low price per kilogram directly lowers operational expenses. Moreover, the ability to use argon in both ion and Hall effect thrusters—which are already mature technologies—means the required engineering adaptations are incremental rather than revolutionary. Several companies and space agencies have already demonstrated argon‑compatible thruster designs.

Operational Flexibility

Argon can be stored as a dense fluid at moderate pressures, allowing for lighter tankage compared to high‑pressure helium or low‑pressure xenon. Its non‑corrosive nature also simplifies propulsion system materials and reduces the need for complex sealing or passivation procedures.

Applications in Current and Future Space Missions

Argon is already finding its way into operational and planned space systems.

Satellite Station‑Keeping and Orbit Adjustments

Many geostationary communications satellites use xenon Hall thrusters for station‑keeping. The lower cost of argon could make it the propellant of choice for next‑generation satellites, especially those in large constellations where thousands of kilograms of propellant are required. For example, SpaceX’s Starlink satellites use krypton thrusters—an intermediate solution between xenon and argon—suggesting that the industry is already moving toward cheaper alternatives.

Deep Space Exploration

NASA’s Psyche mission, launched in 2023, uses a Hall thruster with xenon, but future deep‑space probes may switch to argon to reduce mission costs. The European Space Agency (ESA) has conducted extensive research on argon for its HEMPT (High Efficiency Multistage Plasma Thruster) concept, targeting the exploration of the outer solar system. The lower mass of argon enables higher exhaust velocities, which is ideal for missions with very large delta‑v requirements.

The upcoming NASA‑ESA Mars sample return campaign and concepts like the lunar Gateway could benefit from argon‑based tugs that transfer cargo between Earth orbit and the Moon. The ability to refuel with locally produced argon—potentially extracted from the Martian atmosphere (which is 1.9% argon)—opens the door for in‑situ resource utilization (ISRU), reducing the need to launch propellant from Earth.

Interplanetary Cargo and Crewed Missions

For crewed missions to Mars, the propellant mass dominates spacecraft mass. Using argon could cut the propellant mass budget by 30% or more compared to xenon, while also lowering cost and enabling ISRU on Mars. NASA’s next‑generation electric propulsion concepts, such as the Advanced Electric Propulsion System (AEPS), are designed with flexibility to use either xenon, krypton, or argon—acknowledging the future role of argon.

Challenges and Limitations of Argon Propulsion

Despite its many advantages, argon is not without challenges.

Higher Ionization Energy

The additional 3.63 eV required to ionize argon translates into slightly lower thruster efficiency if power processing units are not optimized. However, modern power electronics can adjust discharge voltages to compensate, and the overall system efficiency can still exceed 50 %—comparable to xenon systems.

Storage and Feed System Differences

Argon’s low critical temperature (150.86 K) means that it cannot be stored as a liquid at ambient temperatures, unlike xenon (critical temperature 289.77 K). For high‑density storage, argon must be either compressed to very high pressures or kept at cryogenic temperatures. This can complicate tank design and add thermal management requirements. However, ongoing advances in composite‑overwrap pressure vessels (COPVs) and cryocoolers are mitigating these issues.

Lower Thruster Efficiency at Low Powers

At very low input powers (below 1 kW), argon’s higher ionization energy becomes more pronounced, and thruster efficiency can drop below that of xenon. For small satellites and CubeSats, where power is limited, xenon or krypton may remain better choices. Argon shines in the medium‑to‑high power regime (2 kW and above) that characterizes station‑keeping and interplanetary propulsion.

Plasma Behavior and Stability

Argon plasmas have slightly different current‑voltage characteristics than xenon plasmas. In Hall thrusters, the lower atomic mass can lead to different electron mobility and magnetic confinement requirements. Engineers must recalibrate the magnetic field topology and channel geometry to maintain stable operation. This has been successfully demonstrated by several research groups, but it requires additional development work.

Future Prospects: The Growing Role of Argon

Research into argon‑based electric propulsion is accelerating, driven by both economic and technical factors.

  • High‑Power Hall Thrusters for Tugs: ESA’s HEMPT and NASA’s AEPS programs are actively testing argon compatibility. The AEPS thruster, designed for the lunar Gateway, has been operated with argon at specific impulse levels exceeding 3,000 s.
  • Refueling and ISRU: The ability to extract argon from the Martian atmosphere—which is about 1.9% argon and the rest CO₂—could provide a virtually unlimited supply of propellant for return missions. The Mars Ascent Vehicle concept could use a small argon‑fed ion thruster to launch samples into Mars orbit.
  • Constellation Economics: Mega‑constellations like Starlink and future LEO communication networks need thousands of thrusters. Switching from krypton to argon could cut propellant costs by another factor of ten, while also reducing system complexity.
  • Nuclear Electric Propulsion: For crewed missions requiring hundreds of kilowatts of power, argon is a leading candidate because its low cost and abundant supply make large‑scale tankage affordable. Studies for a nuclear‑electric Mars transfer vehicle often assume argon as the propellant.

Several start‑up companies are also exploring argon‑fed electrospray and field‑emission thrusters, potentially opening up micro‑propulsion applications for small satellites.

Conclusion

Argon has moved from a laboratory curiosity to a serious contender in the electric propulsion landscape. Its low cost, high specific impulse, reduced erosion, and compatibility with established thruster architectures make it an ideal propellant for a wide range of missions—from Earth‑orbiting satellite clusters to human expeditions to Mars. While challenges remain in storage and low‑power efficiency, ongoing engineering innovations are rapidly closing the gap. As the space industry continues to demand more affordable and sustainable propulsion, argon is poised to become the workhorse propellant of the electric‑thruster era.

For further reading, explore the following resources: