Originally Posted by
TSORon
One word. Vapor. Unless of course you are claiming that hydrogen peroxide does not produce vapors, in which case I have to ask what methods you use as a “professional”.
They don’t detect “explosives”, they detect chemicals. That detection means that a more in-depth investigation is needed. That’s all.
Like the ETD systems we use, they can be programed to detect just about any chemical. The US Coast Guard uses the same ETD technology to detect drug traces on interdicted vessels. They are looking for drugs and have their units programed to do so, the TSA is not looking for drugs and our units are not programed for it.
Hydrogen peroxide is naturally unstable. At high enough concentrations, it would produce a lot of toxic vapor that would be extremely harmful to the person carrying it in an "open" container. If placed in a common "sealed" container, like a water bottle. The bottle would explode due to the vapor pressure on the bottle wall.
In either event, the person attempting to carry the sufficiently strong hydrogen peroxide would suffer consequences long before getting to the airport. Likewise, if the solution were dilute enough to carry, it could still be harmful as it could still be a power oxidizing agent, but would not be able to cause an explosion that would take down a commercial aircraft. Perhaps L. Ron Hubbard wrote a story about hydrogen peroxide taking down an airplane.
Also, the ETD does not, I repeat, does not detect chemicals. It only detects chemical signatures (functional groups). It can not differentiat between the chemical signature that might be, for example, in certain hand lotions versus the same chemical signature of an explosive. This is why there are so many false positives.
Clearly, Ron is not an expert on this subject.
