Seems like a weird take to me. Chemical rocketry can meet all of our space "needs" (e.g. satellite launches) and many of our space "wants" (e.g. solar system ex

Seems like a weird take to me. Chemical rocketry can meet all of our space "needs" (e.g. satellite launches) and many of our space "wants" (e.g. solar system exploration, large space telescopes). The "chemical" part of chemical rocketry has proven to be pretty economical - the fuel itself is just a small portion of the cost of a rocket. It's building the thing that's expensive. Why incur the safety hazards of nuclear propulsion or the large fixed costs of something like a sky crane when we've just developed reusable rockets?