"Do you have data? Because there is enough wind potential alone in the US to satisfy the US power requirements 10x over."

When it is blowing, possibly. However it requires backup power for those inconvenient times when there is no (or little) wind. The cost of backup plants is one of the hidden costs of wind.

"While China continues to build a handful of nuclear plants, their wind generation capacity is already far ahead of what they're producing from nuclear"

China is planning on 400-500 GW of nuclear electric production by 2050. That will likely dwarf the real output of its wind farms.

http://thediplomat.com/2014/10/why-china-will-go-all-in-on-n...

"Wind is already cheaper than nuclear without subsidies in the USA and the UK. It also kills less birds and bats than buildings, cell towers, and cats."

Wind might be cheaper in the very best siting areas. The long-term durability of the generators remains to be seen.

Regardless, the affordability and effectiveness of wind has long been exaggerated by advocates. Here is a more balanced treatment:

http://www.strata.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Full-Report...

The report's conclusion:

'The true cost of wind energy is higher than most cost estimates calculate. Mandates requiring the use of wind energy increase electricity costs for consumers, and subsidies mask the actual cost of doing so. RPS require intermittent renewable energy to exist, but at the expense of utilities and consumers. The PTC makes wind power cheaper for utilities and consumers, but at the expense of taxpayers.

Through such policies, U.S. policymakers have essentially decided that electricity consumers will have wind power, even if it is more expensive. The cost of this decision has fallen to U.S. taxpayers and consumers of electricity. When weighing the costs and benefits of wind power, not including all of the hidden costs makes wind power appear to be a more attractive option than it actually is. Energy policy decisions, however, should be based on a more complete estimate of the cost of wind energy.'

"You mention next-gen nuclear tech will come in at 5 cents/kwh. Utility solar is already below 4 cents/kwh"

That is heavily subsidized, and also in the very best siting environment. Obviously those installations produce nothing at night, and even during the day average well under their peak output.

Solar is in no way a replacement for reliable, 24/7 nuclear generation.