I respectfully disagree. I would at least refer to a number of evolutionary biologists or geneticists to quantify the risks of generating such a significant mas

I respectfully disagree. I would at least refer to a number of evolutionary biologists or geneticists to quantify the risks of generating such a significant mass of these things. I speak of "viral mass" as a proxy to number of viral bodies, which is probably proportional to its power to mutate and do something unexpected, not inside the batteries but rather in the production thereof. What are we going to do -- create a farm of infected tomato plants? Are we going to evolve the virus until it produces more bodies faster? I'm not so concerned about viruses that affect humans. I'm concerned about an epidemic of plant viruses, and everything we haven't thought about. I wish teflon stayed on surfaces, certain chemicals didn't deplete our ozone layer, that we didn't have to ask questions about man-made global warming. But to assume that the things we produce would only have the desired effects with total disregard for physics and biology is, well, absolutely stupid. On the other hand, I see this as an awesome opportunity to proceed with nanotechnology. After all, a virus is the ultimate self replicating robot.