A space elevator only provides access to geostationary orbit.  One can climb up to LEO altitudes along an elevator, but that doesn&#x27;t mean much.  You wouldn&#x27;t be in orbit, but sitting stationary as if atop a tall building.  So we would still need to launch rockets for any space use in LEO (GPS and imaging sats for example).  And any such orbiting objects would of course have to be navigated around this obstruction.  Many useful orbit types would have to be outlawed to protect the elevator.<p>I wonder, is easier to launch into a LEO from the ground or from a fixed point at say 300km altitude?  If you climbed a space elevator you would still need 8km&#x2F;s of speed laterally.  So you jump off and fire your rocket.  You still fall towards the ground, requiring some thrust to keep out of the atmosphere.  Without the arcing trajectory of a ground launch you would have to accelerate roughly twice as quickly, requiring larger engines.  Is that really any better than starting from the ground as we do today?<p>Or you could climb to a near-geostationary position, burn retrograde until you touch the atmosphere, then aerobrake down to LEO.  That&#x27;s still a heck of a lot of effort.