re: IAA tomfoolery
"Emphasize use of existing transportation tools: Require no fundamentally new and expensive propulsion systems or launch vehicles."
Given that this is a plan for the next 50 years (ROTFL), this is SO misguided. First, launch costs need to be reduced to enable many missions as opposed to infrequent expensive missions.
Secondly, high ISP plasma propulsion or somesuch is needed to make viable trip times to the targeted NEOs and Mars. Nuclear power should absolutely be considered with any 50 year planning horizon (a joke in my opinion).