Quick blip in here, CO2 may work, but with a few considerations, the CO2 is most efficient when in the higher temps, above 95F is nice, the needed level of photo synthesis from using T5's is questionable on weather there is enough to make an efficient use of the CO2. There is an argument on weather or not even a 400W HPS can generate enough photo synthesis in the plant to make the use worth the attempt. When you get to using 600w and 1K, the idea is if your not using CO2 then you are just wasting light productivity.
Well, on another note, the dialog on wattage use and heat put is nice and very informed, and let me throw a question or two out there. Jam I like you and am just stirring the waters a little. It seems like many other factors besides wattage can contribute to heat and out put, for instance, a 1K HPS and a 1K MH are going to use the same wattage, but will have a significant difference in heat output. Also in the area of wattage usage, the electronic balase verses a coil based one will perform with the same wattage, but the electronic/digital will be able to consume less energy because of the efficiency of the ballasts ability to generate and use power in the various ways. Just some food for thought.

Now on to the case at hand, as I pulled in some vanilla smoke threw a cob pipe this morning while sitting upon my thrown I pondered the facts of this compelling case and attempted to weigh out both sides of the argument and as I did that, Like a light bulb a thought hit me. We may have a motive, being that the defendant is a covert salesmen for the product in question, but what would be the method in which he is attempted to bamboozle and mislead the jury? I mean, does he take all the plants out every other day and place them in another area? Under an HPS? Wouldn't they out grow the T5 set up and have to be trained. Does he move the arrow cloner for each picture? Seems like quite allot of work IMO.
Well, perhaps the prosecution will make a rebuttal and shed light on these facts in question.
Adieu