Wind + storage has yet to find acceptance as being commercial viable. The general plan presented by the green in Germany and nearby country is to wait for green hydrogen to become economical viable and use natural gas in the mean time.
Last time I checked, the current numbers is around 20x in cost to turn wind into hydrogen, compared to current hydrogen prices. It should be noted that hydrogen itself is not commercial viable to be burned for energy, which puts green hydrogen far from being cheaper than nuclear. There exist several other experimental and research experiments into storage for wind but so far nothing has research the point of commercial companies buying renewables energy when it is cheap and selling it when it is expensive.
For solar, renewables + batteries is cheaper since the batteries only need a few hours of capacity and they get a charge cycle each day. Since you can calculate the ROI very simply, you can find how many days (or rather nights) a lithium battery need to discharge in order to back the initial cost. For wind you got low wind conditions that last weeks or even months, occurring maybe a few times a year, and so capacity need to be very high and you get very few charge cycles. Thus the need for a storage medium that provide very high capacity at low costs, while at the same time being commercial viable compared to nuclear.
If wind + storage was cheaper than building nuclear than people would be building and investing into it right now. Instead they invest into natural gas and build pipe lines to Russia, which hints towards the economical reality that Germany is in. Those natural gas plants and pipe lines has a life expectancy of many decades, and unless a major shift occurs will be a central part of the energy grid until probably early 2100. What people build today is what they intended to use in the future.