We were puzzled by reactions to a recent publication about using carbon nanotubes as a replacement for tungsten in light bulbs, and this being a step forward when it is actually a step backwards.
(Being London based, we feel duty bound to quibble with the notion that Edison invented the light bulb he improved on existing designs and commercialised them).
It is worth remebering that they all started out with carbon filaments (carbonised cotton, bamboo etc), long before tungsten made its appearance in 1906.
What would be a step forward would be the replacement of incandescent bulbs with ones based on field emission from carbon nanotubes. We have seen a number of these, but so far the cost/efficient has not been sufficient to consider displacing fluorescent bulbs.