On Nuclear Power

Here's my thing about nuclear power: I don't get why we're bothering to discuss it. Like fossil fuels, there's a limited supply of it. Like fossil fuels, there's a certain amount of run-of-the-mill pollution and contamination that seems to come with it. Like fossil fuels, only more so, there's the possibility of, I don't know, a giant catastrophe right next door to the biggest metropolis in the world that could kill millions of people. Unlike, for example, wind energy, it's not actually really, really easy to add capacity to our nuclear power portfolio right now. To add new nuclear power, it takes a hell of a lot of money, time, effort, etc. Nobody wants a nuclear power plant in their backyard, and you can't blame them, because the best we can say is that we're not sure it causes cancer. But it probably does; hell, it would be weird if it didn't. And what with all the nuclear disasters we're all completely justified in wanting to regulate these plants to within an inch of their lives, if not further. The result of which is that it's all barely economically viable, if at all. How do you add more wind power? You stick an extra windmill in the middle of Kansas. It's quite simple, actually. As far as I know there really just isn't anything we don't know about how to get lots more wind power, right here, right now, and it wouldn't cost very much to do. The cost to scale our solar program up is probably not very high either, and from what I've heard they think there are some exciting breakthroughs in the field of solar technology coming rather soon. So what exactly is the point of nuclear power in this country right now? What does it give us that we can't get just as easily if not more easily using cleaner, safer, perpetual sources of energy? Isn't nuclear sort of a dominated strategy, even aside from the catastrophic-disaster factor?