I'm ordering bulbs for my lowel dp's. There seems to be a choice between 3000 bulbs which last many times as long as the 3200 bulbs. I'm curious how much of a difference in light temperature this is on a practical level... generally 200 doesn't seem that noticeable, so I'm thinking of going with the 3000 bulbs to save hassle and replacements, but don't want to end up with overly-warm light. I'm curious to hear from those of you who prefer 3200 over 3000 or vice versa.

For general eng type use, I wouldn't worry at all.
Actually 3000 can be closer to household lamps which are usually more in the 2800K range - so you might be better off.

I'd only go with the 3200 K if you need very exact color reproduction for product shoots (however if you use the 3000K lamps only and nothing else, even that will be okay)

. . .but don't want to end up with overly-warm light. I'm curious to hear from those of you who prefer 3200 over 3000 or vice versa.

I say go for the cheaper more durable option.
Whenever you're shooting under man-made lighting you should ALWAYS set a manual white balance, so the color temperature of your lights doesn't matter -- 3200 and 3000 will end up looking exactly the same to your camera. The only reason one or the other might make a difference is if you are mixing them with other types of lights, but since neither one is going to mix well with daylight, a couple hundred degrees won't make any difference at all.

BTW, if I set up a series of indoor test shots, each with different color temperature of light, and if each shot was white balanced for each type of lighting, you would not be able to pick out which shots were done at 3000, 3200, 4600, 5600, or anything else.

I'm about to buy more lamps and noticed there's a big difference in life according to lowel. E.g. 3200K EHG bulb lasts 2000 hours, whereas the 3000k EHF lasts only 300 hours (but outputs about 20% more light for same wattage). I think I'll go for the cheaper more durable EHG.