It's depressing, sure, but I've read it twice and didn't find it particularly hard going either time

Well, it is written in fairly straightforward English, and it is always clear what happens, etc. I just constantly kept wondering why I should put up with all the awfulness. It is not as if it is an ingenious dissecting of the subtleties of something. Instead, I found it rather blunt all around, almost as if it were written in all caps. At some point I decided that I could as well just read something else.

I like his writings, but I somehow didn't see how I would benefit from reading 1984, except being able to get all the references.

Your phraseology suggests that you have not, in fact read 1984. Don't worry - this is something that you have in common with most people who quote it.

That's true. It is also a pretty hard book to read. I started and put it down at some point because I found it awful. Years later I read a text by Asimov saying that, while interesting, it is not very good as a work of fiction. I was relieved, I must say.

(I am trying to remember where Asimov wrote that, so yes, citation needed and pending).

The next reactors to be built widely will probably those that burn nuclear waste. That is, "partitioning and transmutation". It seems (although it doesn't say in that article) that you can burn nuclear waste in a way that produces excess energy. Since you need an accelerator to keep the reaction going, you have automatic shutdown in case of loss of mains power.

The point of heavy lifting is that, once you have it, you can resort to cheap methods for everything else. 10,000 tons is a moderately large container ship (an Emma Maersk weights up to 400,000 tons when loaded) but still quite big, and most importantly, sturdy. If your target weight is 10kt, you could really put enough shielding (using standard materials) around a big enough living area plus enough engine, fuel, and assorted gear to not get bored nor fried. All with existing tech. And since it is with existing tech, it would also be doable with reasonable amounts of money.

This is not to say that I do not welcome current efforts to research and explore our solar system and beyond. "We" are doing a pretty good job using probes and stuff, and it's probably the best approach for now. Here I agree with you completely. I am not saying that we should put a 10kt ship up there, because I know full well that this is not reasonable with /existing/ tech.

But if we had heavy lifting tech... then we could build space ships, robotic or not, without having to care so much about weight, it all would be a hell of a lot easier. Also, if had we heavy lifting engines, landing on mars would be a lot easier too. Radiation? No problem, just pack enough shielding. Etc. That's why I think that a powerful engine is the most important thing we need. And it must be a lot more powerful than what we have now.