“Wind and geothermal are more space efficient than nuclear”
I never argued that nuclear always lost to solar, I even suggested it should be able to use less land than your examples.
I am arguing it never beats wind.
From the data I can see (e.g. https://www.ourworldofenergy.com/vignettes.php?type=wind-pow...), wind needs at least 30,000 acres per GW, a far cry from the nuclear 1,000 acres for 7 GW above.
You’re looking at the distance between turbines as if that land was useless for anything else. It’s not.
Put a turbine in the on a 10,000 acre farm and you’ll still have a 9,999 acre farm. Put a nuclear reactor on that same land and you’ll be doing a lot less farming.
Anyway, we probably need both, and we definitely need to stop burning fossil fuels, so let's not disparage one in favor of the other.