Energy economist A.F Alhajji makes the case for the Iranian nuclear program on energy grounds, arguing that all other issues aside, Iran really does need the production capacity:
Iran, it is often claimed, has no need for nuclear power, given its abundant oil and natural gas reserves. But the Iranian government is under economic and political pressure to supply increasing amounts of electricity to its growing population and fragile economy. Using oil or natural gas for domestic electricity threatens oil and gas exports, which are the principle source of government revenues. Indeed, with domestic oil consumption growing at a higher rate than production, government revenues from oil exports are already in decline.
Thus, nuclear power will halt the decline in government revenues by freeing more oil and natural gas for export. Iran's natural gas resources, if developed, would not be a substitute for cheap nuclear power, because gas is more profitable in other uses than in power generation.
The Iranian government fears that electricity shortages, slow economic growth, and high unemployment will turn the populace against it. As social tensions increase, political turmoil will follow.
Nuclear power offers the possibility of cheap, plentiful electricity, which will contribute to social and political stability. Iranian experts argue that, in considering the trade-off between internal unrest and external sanctions, the Iranian government must choose between domestic security and international security.
This critique seems rather vulnerable to the offers of Western countries to provide Iran with light-water nuclear reactors, but assuming that Iran -- not unreasonably -- doesn't exactly desire a dependence on American goodwill for their energy production, there may be something here.
