In looking up the history on fluorescent bulbs just now I found a little blurb in "the web site that shall never be named" that said by 1951 the US produced more light by flouorescent systems than by incandescent systems.
What that means is that the biederenderen still holding out for incandescent actually lost that war 58 years ago!
At the same time that means the vast power savings Congresscritters imagine to be available by swapping out incandescent for fluorescent systems JUST AREN'T THERE!
Sure, I'm saving on my own power bill, but we have a lot of lights. The poor, with but a single pitiful lightbulb hanging down from a wire run through the ceiling, simply don't have the power consumption necessary to create a basis for savings. (Like that "Depression Era" imagery? With the Obama Depression in place there'll be more of it.)
But, back to the LEDs, we like them because they are not hot.
I think most people simply didn't realize that except for their home, mosty lighting is/was flourescent. It's a visual thing...The pretty incandescent bulb. The curly bulb still doesn't seem right...Bulbs aren't curly!!! :-)
I have replaced my incandescent bulbs.
In the end, the Congress was the ultimate marketing tool.
They're pulling the same crap with the energy bill and the health bill.