Considering the social, political, infrastructure and environmental costs associated with energy usage, I would have no problem if there was an "energy guzzler" tax on inefficient electronic/electric products, much like a "gas guzzler" tax on vehicles, to encourage the development and purchase of more efficient products. But all taxes like this are really scams to get the government more money at the expense of the citizens. I consider incentives to do the desired thing, rather than punishments for doing something else, a better solution.
I despise the idea of a "luxury tax". What's a luxury? Who gets to decide? Anything that isn't food, shelter or clothing is a luxury, so probably around 90% of things we buy in this country are luxuries (that's one of the reasons our economy can be fragile--we're far too dependent on consumer's buying things they want, not things they need, and when things get scary, people stop buying a lot of things they don't need).
But the Socialists in our government like to play the class war by picking on things that only wealthy people can afford. So we see things like a luxury tax on yachts--which almost destroys the yacht-building industry and costs thousands of people their jobs (early 90's http://www.nytimes.com/1991/07/21/ny...oat-sales.html
Or we see a luxury tax on cars that penalizes car companies for developing new safety and environmental technologies, when then try to recoup some of their investment by putting those technologies in their more expensive cars that can bear the cost adder.
As long as companies or individuals can buy, sell or trade carbon credits, the "re-distribution of the world's wealth" plan masquerading as environmental policy is another good example.