Renewables and reduced consumption is the answer, not swapping out one fossil fuel for another, which - incidentally - if you did it at large scale would have massive geopolitical consequences.

Your 'people are literally dying' holds zero weight: energy consumption will be what it will be unless we actually do something about that and it is the first - and by far the easiest - thing to address, well before we get to the choice of how to generate the power that we actually need. Our current consumption patterns per individual are simply not sustainable. Apologies for the bad news.

Once you've solved that people will still be dying, this time because we waited too long to do something about it. But hopefully fewer people. And switching to nuclear isn't by itself some magic bullet, it will be extremely costly and there will be accidents that will take decades or even centuries to clean up, besides the waste issue.

Nuclear proponents are much too prone to seeing it as a silver bullet, which it really is not, it has a whole slew of problems none of which you have even attempted to address. Finland is the only country that actually has the right attitude when it comes to nuclear.