It only kills in case of a serious incident. Incidents are rare.
Coal pollution and deaths are guaranteed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_the_co...
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Coal_mining_disasters
Carbon capture and storage technologies also lead to 50..91% increased electricity costs.
http://www.ekopolitan.com/climate/ccs-five-reports-realistic...
Clean coal and clean fission are arguably about as likely, and would be about as expensive.
Why bother, when you have solar?
Because solar is intermittent, and isn't practical at all in many parts of the world. The true environmental impact of nuclear is also arguably less, since solar requires a lot of space per watt produced by comparison.
Next-gen nuclear reactor designs from Thorcon Power, Terrestrial and others are very near to perfectly safe, and also produce much less long-term nuclear waste than current designs. There will be an ongoing need for clean, high-density electricity sources.
The solution to that is simple, use less power at night. I.e. don't make so much aluminum when there is no sun or wind. We could decide as a society to trade a few percent of our wealth for using much less coal and nuclear if we wanted (and if our society were organized in a rational fashion).
Also: don't heat with electricty, but use e.g. solar thermal or geothermal power.
Efficiency is great and should be encouraged. We still need increasing amounts of reliable, plentiful and cheap energy going forward. You may be willing to accept a diminishing standard of living, most are not.