the answer is D, none of the above

I got a kick out of this title, as the content of the article simply didn't bear out the promise. (And thanks to reader James Moe for the tip):

Easing gas pains with new fuels
Alternative energy may effectively combat rising prices
PETER VAN DOREN, CATO INSTITUTE:
(B)ut in the short run, believe it or not, all that people can do is try to curb their discretionary driving and in effect, react to the high prices by consuming less.
...
But (ethanol) is more expensive than conventional fuels and it does require taxpayer subsidy.
...
Nuclear energy doesn’t have much to do with transportation (...) I’m somewhat skeptical that that will happen is natural gas prices come down, because of liquefied natural gas, and then I think most new power plants be natural gas.

So, you heard it first, from the professional expert:

Conserve.
Ethanol requires subsidies.
Nuclear energy doesn't help move cars around.

And then, the magic white whale of LNG is proposed, which is fine in certain respects, but again something of a non-sequiter as a way to "ease gas pains."

Maybe maalox will power our future.
Meanwhile, the price of gasoline will continue to climb.