So what have you done to save the world today? Used a bit less water? Perhaps. Recycled a bit more rubbish? Of course, as More4 News viewers, you are clearly caring and intelligent consumers. But there aren't many tax incentives coaxing people towards those greener choices, helping to stop the damage we do to the world around us. The latest thinking is that perhaps the taxman should reward green choices and punish environmentally damaging ones. Roz Upton looks at how it might work.

We use them without a second thought, power showers, disposable batteries, ordinary light bulbs. But our consumer-led society is damaging the environment. Domestic households account for half / the UK's water consumption, almost 1/3 of greenhouse gas emissions and 10% of waste. Now a report commissioned by Green Alliance recommends inefficiency charges on products that are more damaging to the environment than greener alternatives, the aim to discourage consumers from buying them.

Guy Thompson: First, that is the deliberate ploys, is to make people realize, to hit people in the pockets, and to reflect the environmental impact of a particular, particularly inefficient or wastful product.

Despite the report author's holding back on recommending a levy of taxation, householders are upset at the very thought of it.

An unidentified woman: If they are living on the fixed income, they certainly don't want more increases.

An unidentified man: We have enough taxes, as it is. Um, I'd rather see we get rid of inefficient products, and have the efficient ones.

An unidentified man: Anything that can be publicized that makes the awareness more, is good, but I don't think taxing something is necessarily giving ur, positive signals, I think in fact it gives a negative signal.

So-called "green taxes" are not without precedent. In Ireland, the tax on plastic bags introduced 3 years ago has cut their use by more than 90%.

Some green measures can have undesirable side effects. Take taxing plastic bags for example, it may drastically cut their distribution; but some people use them to put rubbish in, and without them, more people are likely to buy bin liners, and they're made of tougher plastic, which uses more energy in the recycling process.

Of course a tax on some brands of dustbin liners might encourage people to opt for eco-friendly varieties, but in isolation, these kind of levies will make little impact. Some report sources at the Policy Studies Institute are also advocating penalizing people who don't sort their rubbish for recycling. They're suggesting national water metering to reward those who use less, and reduction in council tax for householders who insulate their homes to conserve energy. Until now, most green taxes in the UK have been named businesses.

Paul Ekins: No one likes taxes, and householders vote whereas businesses don't, uh, a householder has been quite effective in, uh, through various consumer councils in voicing their concerns.

Economists warn any new measures must be carefully adopted to avoid creating unnecessary bureaucracy.

Stephen Smith: I think there's a great danger, for we overcomplicate the tax system, these, a lot of little taxes on products that people believe are environmentally disreputable can make, do a lot of damage to the efficiency of revenue collection to be very ineffective, very costly to run, and may not achieve much environmental benefit.

Punitive taxes may be unwelcome, but with sea levels rising, and scientists predicting that global temperatures will increase by up to 6 degrees celsius in the next century, drastic changes to our domestic habits are inevitable if we aren't to protect the Earth we live in. And this is the latest bright idea on how to initiate that change.

Roz Upton's there on the rising seas, and perhaps rising taxes. . .