Where in reality... Everywhere those incandescent bulbs are used for heat in the north, they will have to be replaced with more energy consuming heaters - Forcing expensive overkill.
And don't think that is some small concern.
My crawl space has a string of lights - 100w incandescent bulbs which supply, well... light, when I need to go down there. But there is a secondary purpose - When it is 10 below or more, I turn those bulbs on, and they supply just enough distributed heat to keep my pipes from freezing.
The old well, down at the ranch, is always kept from freezing by a single bulb... all winter long.
Yep. I recall writing a congresscritter about the whole fallacy of wasted heat from an incandescent bulb.
At the height of winter here, subzero temperatures are common outside, and we have 8 hours of daylight and 16 hours of darkness. Needless to say, as a general rule, after sunset it gets colder out. In those rooms where artificial light is used (where people are) the little bit of extra heat is welcome. And, as you pointed out, those bulbs can heat anything from doghouses to crawlspaces and pump houses to engine compartments...By contrast, LED's are slow to light up in the cold and useless as a heat source. Which leaves 150W heat lamps...when a 60, 75, or 100 W bulb would have done the trick.
In midsummer, we have 16 hours of daylight, and only eight of darkness, so the lights tend to not be used much, and the heat they might have generated isn't a problem. It's hard enough getting the kids to bed when it is still light out at 10PM...You don't save any energy over something you don't use.
I like the warmth of incandescent lighting over the harsh light of LEDs, too.
It's just another "one size fits all" solution for a problem that hasn't been proven to exist.