If you need guaranteed power at any time of day, fossil fuels and nuclear can provide that, solar and wind can't – while batteries can smooth over the intermitt

If you need guaranteed power at any time of day, fossil fuels and nuclear can provide that, solar and wind can't – while batteries can smooth over the intermittency, the amount of battery storage required to provide the same power availability as a coal or nuclear plant is cost-prohibitive. So, if we are comparing apples to apples, coal plants vs nuclear is a legitimate comparison, wind and solar aren't. Pumped hydro does better than batteries, but building new dams causes massive ecological damage, and in some parts of the world fresh water is a rather scarce resource. The heated water from a nuclear power plant arguably does less environmental damage overall than a big new dam does.