The future isn't what it used to be

That left hand dome has what looks like a turbine from a hydroelectric plant in it.

??? the moon is hydro-powered ???
 

And almost the entire interior of the habitats are exposed to direct cosmic rays from overhead.

Nobody accused artists of being good engineers. ;-)
 

Given some dirt-cheap way to lift large payloads to LEO and all of the glamorous things are, if not straightforward, at least feasible. No cheap LEO, and none of the glamorous projects are possible. A necessary condition, if not sufficient. NASA spent our tax dollars on the wrong thing for the last 40 years...
 

I've been watching the talk about cheap ways to put stuff into orbit for a long time now.  Just about every concept requires a large up-front investment to get costs down; beanstalks, Lofstrom loops, even the 4-P laser launch schemes need plenty of money before you get something that flies.  Some, like 4-P, impose very stringent limits on what you can launch (small, rugged) and thus what you need to have in orbit to make use of it.

I don't think NASA can be blamed for missing the boat(s).  NASA gets its money and marching orders from Congress, which is owned by various lobbies.  NASA didn't decide to buy segmented solid-fuel boosters for the Shuttle, Jake Garn said "you will buy from this supplier" (which was in his state).