We'll there a whole lot of folks on the planet and if they all make incremental change, the effect can be large. For example the EEEEE has calculated that "The potential energy savings 'of phasing out incandescent light bulbs' are 10 billion Euros per year in Europe alone, along with 25 million tonnes of CO2. Globally, these savings are roughly four to five times. " They go on to say "There is also a striking unbalance between the amount of electricity used by incandescent bulbs, their sales volumes and the work they actually perform: Incandescent bulbs consume 25 % of all electricity used for lighting in the world, but they only produce 4 % of all electric light. This is despite the fact that they represent 2/3 of all global lamp sales! Huge savings can thus be made in the way we are lighting our offices, roads, shops and factories. It would be a real shame, if we let our nostalgia for a century-old, inefficient bulb, obscure the need to switch to more energy efficient technologies." Now this article is four years out of date, but its points are still valid. For real research and development to occur, there needs to be a market. Thats what these regulations have done. They are creating demand wich will spur inovation. Supply & demand are what the market economy is all about. I'm all for leveraging the good parts of capitalism and consumerism to make some headway towards resolving our environmental issues.