Nuclear does indeed not require sacrifice, but it does require things like manufacture, transport and use of dangerous materials. (And not just radioactive, it's also a matter of poison, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32613470 has numbers.) Handling dangerous materials is expensive and IMO likely to grow more so, as our societies seem to grow more risk-averse. We didn't have policies to avoid all traffic deaths a few decares ago, for example. And with many voters being opposed to nuclear, I think states will be less likely provide free insurance cover in 10-20 years than was the case 10-20 years ago. This too increases the costs to nuclear power operators.

An increasing cost curve that faces a decreasing cost curve for solar and wind isn't something about which you can say "is the best". You need some solid arguments. (FWIW, I think nuclear has no hope.)