Running out of space for wind? Huh? Yes obviously we use the best places first but the entire Earth has wind, and almost every land usage can be co sited with wind towers.
The chances for such events are vanishingly low when it comes to modern reactors. Seriously, as hard as it is to believe, we've come so, so far from Chernobyl. Thorium-based reactors are meltdown-proof [0], and Thorium comes with the plus in that it's not as easily weaponizable [1].
> 2) Nuclear waste storage.
Thorium reactors also produce less dangerous waste [2], which is great! They're not a panacea by any means- it is still technically possible to make weapons using Thorium reactors even if it's more difficult, and fuel is harder to prepare, but I do think the upsides greatly overcome the downsides.
Solar and wind aren't viable everywhere, which is why we need nuclear. The sooner we get over our inveterate fear of it, as difficult as it may be, the better.
[0] https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/200900...
[1] https://whatisnuclear.com/thorium.html#prolif
[2] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257126696_Abundant_...
You say that nuclear has killed fewer people. That's true, but this is not the main problem of Nuclear. The main problems are 1) that catastrophic events can and will happen in the future. That's why nobody wants to live next to a nuclear power plant. 2) Nuclear waste storage.
Why would even invest in nuclear power plants now that it's pretty clear that other alternatives are cheaper and safer? (I'm not saying abandon nuclear power research, there are definitey niche cases where it makes sense, like space exploration).