But I did touch on that in the last paragraph -- the energy required on a rocket to get into LEO is $20/kg, or $2k/person. It's a tiny amount of the total cost of launch.
A large crane is far more efficient at lifting items.
But even if you accept you have to use a rocket, the cost of the fuel is trivial compared with the cost of launch.
If you could vary the exhaust velocity of a rocket continuously, so it was equal to the total delta-V so far, the efficiency of converting jet kinetic energy to vehicle energy would be 100%, as the jet would be left stationary in the reference frame of the launcher. (This ignores gravitational potential energy and also that the mass ratio would diverge to infinity at zero velocity, but never mind that.) In practice, using a lower Isp first stage and a higher Isp upper stage partially implements this, and the overall efficiency isn't too bad.
The problem in space access isn't an energy problem, it's a method problem.
At 20c/kWh it would cost $100 to lift a 2 ton car and 4 occupants into space, or $100 each to get to the c. 400km altitude of the ISS.
Of course to stay in space requires far more energy as you also have to go sideways, fast. Very Fast.
But it's still pretty low. Sticking 1kg into Geostationary Orbit and keeping it there would take about 15kWh. A 2 ton vehicle with 4 passengers at 20c/kWh would be $1500 each.
Of course we lack a practical way of doing this other than with rockets, and thus enter the tyranny of the rocket equation. But the fuel cost is still far lower than the cost of the entire shuttle or apollo system, as shown by the efficiency of SpaceX -- fuel costs of $20/kg to LEO, or $1500 for a typical adult.