Hi Mark. It’s my understanding the kits cost about a $1000.00. When you thing about it that is not very much to pay for something that has the possibility of working. Like anything else there is nothing that is fool proof.

The ability to cut down on false reports could almost be eliminated by the number of units along a known fault. If you see the same signal on two units the likely hood of both of them being false indications would be almost nil.

There is another problem and that is noise such as what BART produces that can cover up a signal. You have to find an area that doesn’t have much in the way electrical equipment in use.

Parkfield is a very touchy subject to some people. There are those who said that it should have never been done in the first place then there are those who say lets end it now before we waste anymore money and there are those who say it should continue. “Murphy’s Law” has a way of sneaking up on you when you least expect it. One day they will have that quake they have been looking for and no one will be watching if they shut the system down. There are those who say the 1983 Coalinga quake was the quake they were looking for. The only problem was that it didn’t occur at Parkfield. With every quake the conditions that caused that quake are no longer there. It will take a new set of conditions to cause the next quake. They will be similar, but still different. There may be more rocks to shear before it runs into that one big rock. The creep may be slower, or it could be faster. The point at which it locks could be deeper, or closer to the surface. Then again that next big rock to hold things up could still be a 100 years away.

USGS has appropriated some money to put in 10 news sites. Petra and I have been invited to watch the installation of two of them on the Rodgers Creek fault. Being as how they have been able to appropriate the money means someone feels they are a good investment. Just from my own experience I have been able to accurately forecast 7 quakes in the SJB area and 1 at Parkfield. The Bay Area however is a different story. I may see the same thing there that I see at SJB, but the results are not the same. It must also be said that there hasn’t been an indication of every felt quake where I live. Some of them are not on the San Andreas fault and as such there will be no indication at the SJB data.

The ELF site on Fairview road isn’t very far from where I live. Its also located near 3 faults so it should be able to detect a change in any 3 of those faults within limitations.

It has been said that the more data we have the easier if will be to forecast an earthquake. It has also been said that you can suffer from a case of data overload, or a case of much of a good thing. Only time will tell. Take Care…Don in creepy town.