May 31, 2020, 11:57 pm
Last edit by: SPN Lifer
What kind of bath amenities are currently offered by each brand:
List up information on the various hotel chains, so that people can see which ones has already moved to the new policy, and which are still based on the old.
Bulk dispensers (wall mounted or otherwise):
aLoft
element by Westin
Four Points, US (unsure, other areas) (Dec 2020)
Moxy
Residence Inn (Dec 2019)
Single use bottles:
Courtyard (Dec 2020)
Renaissance (Dec 2019)
Ritz Carlton
St. Regis
Westin (Dec 2020)
Mixed, depends on the property:
List up information on the various hotel chains, so that people can see which ones has already moved to the new policy, and which are still based on the old.
Bulk dispensers (wall mounted or otherwise):
aLoft
element by Westin
Four Points, US (unsure, other areas) (Dec 2020)
Moxy
Residence Inn (Dec 2019)
Single use bottles:
Courtyard (Dec 2020)
Renaissance (Dec 2019)
Ritz Carlton
St. Regis
Westin (Dec 2020)
Mixed, depends on the property:
Marriott to Eliminate Single-use Toiletry Bottles
Aug 30, 2019, 3:50 am
#151
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In the air
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, Bonvoy LT Plat, Hilton Gold, GHA Tit, BA Gold, Turkish Elite
Posts: 8,717
Hotels are quick to switch for the so called environmental reasons. I wonder how quickly airlines will be willing to switch from plastic cutlery in coach and provide us with metal utensils which can be seen to some as being more environmentally friendly (if you ignore cleaning/soap impact). I’m sure they won’t be as quick due to added cost and weight.
Aug 30, 2019, 5:25 am
#152
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Plastic cutlery and other disposable such meal-related plastic service-ware used by airlines is petrochemical product in the main and fills up garbage trucks and landfills/incinerators. Maybe it’s best for the environment to ban people from having more than one child and ban travel entirely unless it’s just on your own feet and involves no wheels nor wings, eh? 
Marriott will love that. Not!
Marriott will love that. Not!Last edited by GUWonder; Aug 30, 2019 at 5:38 am
Aug 30, 2019, 7:27 am
#153
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Houston
Programs: UA 1K and Million Miler, *A Gold, Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium, Hertz Five Star,
Posts: 1,301
aside from the fact I completely disagree, there is little to no evidence to support this. The doorknob, toilet handle, and tv remote are what you should be worried about AND if germs are that big of an issue then you should bring your own stuff.
Aug 30, 2019, 7:32 am
#154
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Houston
Programs: UA 1K and Million Miler, *A Gold, Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium, Hertz Five Star,
Posts: 1,301
As currently implemented by Marriott, I'm not sure there really is an environmental benefit. Here's what is currently being used in the limited-service properties: https://www.mariettahospitality.com/...A+Tea+Tree.php
As you may note, they're only 8 oz, non-refillable bottles, complete with a permanently-attached pump dispenser. The current single-use bottles are either 2oz or 1oz depending upon the property. So, 1 dispenser pump bottle = 4-8 regular bottles. Prima-facia it seems like a good deal, BUT what's the real environmental cost? These are single-use bottles and can't be recycled -- there's multiple types of plastic AND most likely a metal spring inside of there, so they're heading straight for the landfill. Seriously, I'll see if I can snag an empty bottle from the hotel this weekend and do a proper teardown with photos for everyone & weigh out the components.
As a side note:
1) Cradle-to-grave, a Mercedes S-Class, including all of the gasoline it will consume in its lifetime, is more environmentally-friendly and puts out less CO2 than a Prius.
2) Cows are quite windy. (We can't have a 100+ post thread on FT without some mention of breaking wind, right?) The result is ~2300kg of CO2 per year. A car puts out ~108g/km. Do the math and you'll find that a single cow's farts in a year are equivalent to driving 21,296km (13,232 miles).
3) I guess if you want to be environmentally-friendly, drive a Mercedes S-Class instead of a Prius and eat more cows to keep them destroying the Earth. .
As you may note, they're only 8 oz, non-refillable bottles, complete with a permanently-attached pump dispenser. The current single-use bottles are either 2oz or 1oz depending upon the property. So, 1 dispenser pump bottle = 4-8 regular bottles. Prima-facia it seems like a good deal, BUT what's the real environmental cost? These are single-use bottles and can't be recycled -- there's multiple types of plastic AND most likely a metal spring inside of there, so they're heading straight for the landfill. Seriously, I'll see if I can snag an empty bottle from the hotel this weekend and do a proper teardown with photos for everyone & weigh out the components.
As a side note:
1) Cradle-to-grave, a Mercedes S-Class, including all of the gasoline it will consume in its lifetime, is more environmentally-friendly and puts out less CO2 than a Prius.
2) Cows are quite windy. (We can't have a 100+ post thread on FT without some mention of breaking wind, right?) The result is ~2300kg of CO2 per year. A car puts out ~108g/km. Do the math and you'll find that a single cow's farts in a year are equivalent to driving 21,296km (13,232 miles).
3) I guess if you want to be environmentally-friendly, drive a Mercedes S-Class instead of a Prius and eat more cows to keep them destroying the Earth. .
Aug 30, 2019, 8:03 am
#155
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,569
Aug 30, 2019, 8:54 am
#156
Join Date: Jun 2013
Programs: DL Plat, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Plat, IHG Plat, Hertz Prez Circle, National Exec
Posts: 1,357
2) Nobody is talking about an epidemic. As I posted earlier in the thread, I think that 99.9% of the time there will be no issue at all. The whole objection is that when I go to a name brand hotel I don't want to have to wonder if I'm running in to that 0.1% situation.
Aug 30, 2019, 9:40 am
#157
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: ORD
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Platinum/LT Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 5,594
In my post that you quoted, I stated that it's good for the environment - yet you accuse me and others of failing to see that? The point is, that if another new technology is invented for toiletries that saves Marriott even more money, they'll switch to that one, whether it's better or worse for the environment. The fact that they can claim this as environmentally friendly is a happy coincidence, and I don't fault them for taking the opportunity to get the good press. But large companies do this stuff to save money.
As one example of many I have in working with big corporations, I recall an executive telling me about an initiative to get rid of styrofoam coffee cups in the break room, and asking employees to bring in their own mugs and wash them. She explained to me how much cheaper it was to supply dish soap in each break room than the ~$1M (IIRC) they spent on styrofoam cups each year, and how they could advertise it as "green" to employees. This example is not uncommon.
Great, now I can look forward to:
1) Dispensers not filled up, needed to call management, wait 30 minutes to 2 hours for someone to come and do the refill, and after-hours, tough luck, sleep dirty.
4) Broken dispensers that makes it hard to get anything out. Call for service? Wait wait and wait, and again, after-hours? Sleep dirty.
1) Dispensers not filled up, needed to call management, wait 30 minutes to 2 hours for someone to come and do the refill, and after-hours, tough luck, sleep dirty.
4) Broken dispensers that makes it hard to get anything out. Call for service? Wait wait and wait, and again, after-hours? Sleep dirty.
Aug 30, 2019, 10:17 am
#158
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: 42.1% in PDX , 49.9% in PVG & 8% in the air somewhere
Programs: Marriott Ambassador Elite, UA 1K, AS MVP GLD 75K, DL Pt
Posts: 1,086
Make of this what you want about disease vectors coming from use of wall-mounted toiletry dispensers:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3126420/
https://www.ajicjournal.org/article/...095-5/fulltext
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world...ser/ar-BBTQ2NB
https://www.healthcarefacilitiestoda...h-risks--19365
https://www.gojo.com/~/media/GOJO%20...aps.ashx?la=en
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3126420/
https://www.ajicjournal.org/article/...095-5/fulltext
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world...ser/ar-BBTQ2NB
https://www.healthcarefacilitiestoda...h-risks--19365
https://www.gojo.com/~/media/GOJO%20...aps.ashx?la=en
Sorry maybe that is why I find water good enough unless I'm covered is something really nasty and need a little something to break it loose.
Aug 30, 2019, 10:17 am
#159
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 3,097
Right, this is all psychological. You're worried about shampoo when the entire room (not to mention trillions of other things you come in contact with every day) is already a "potential infection vector" or whatever.
Aug 30, 2019, 10:19 am
#160
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: 42.1% in PDX , 49.9% in PVG & 8% in the air somewhere
Programs: Marriott Ambassador Elite, UA 1K, AS MVP GLD 75K, DL Pt
Posts: 1,086
It saves money because it costs Marriott less to purchase bulk refills than small bottles. I doubt it has any significant effect on any single property's garbage bill. They probably still use the same number of dumpsters with the same number of pickups. I mean, really, all the bottles in all the rooms of a CY every day maybe fills one garbage bag?
In my post that you quoted, I stated that it's good for the environment - yet you accuse me and others of failing to see that? The point is, that if another new technology is invented for toiletries that saves Marriott even more money, they'll switch to that one, whether it's better or worse for the environment. The fact that they can claim this as environmentally friendly is a happy coincidence, and I don't fault them for taking the opportunity to get the good press. But large companies do this stuff to save money.
As one example of many I have in working with big corporations, I recall an executive telling me about an initiative to get rid of styrofoam coffee cups in the break room, and asking employees to bring in their own mugs and wash them. She explained to me how much cheaper it was to supply dish soap in each break room than the ~$1M (IIRC) they spent on styrofoam cups each year, and how they could advertise it as "green" to employees. This example is not uncommon.
These are two problems I expect as well, although I think it will probably be only 1-2 times per year. I often get into my hotel the night before a meeting and get up and go the next day. No way I'll think to check the soap dispenser in each room. So a 30 min delay in the morning likely means I'm not showering, because I won't be late to my client's meeting. That bar of soap never lets me down, and I feel cleaner than with the liquid soap.
In my post that you quoted, I stated that it's good for the environment - yet you accuse me and others of failing to see that? The point is, that if another new technology is invented for toiletries that saves Marriott even more money, they'll switch to that one, whether it's better or worse for the environment. The fact that they can claim this as environmentally friendly is a happy coincidence, and I don't fault them for taking the opportunity to get the good press. But large companies do this stuff to save money.
As one example of many I have in working with big corporations, I recall an executive telling me about an initiative to get rid of styrofoam coffee cups in the break room, and asking employees to bring in their own mugs and wash them. She explained to me how much cheaper it was to supply dish soap in each break room than the ~$1M (IIRC) they spent on styrofoam cups each year, and how they could advertise it as "green" to employees. This example is not uncommon.
These are two problems I expect as well, although I think it will probably be only 1-2 times per year. I often get into my hotel the night before a meeting and get up and go the next day. No way I'll think to check the soap dispenser in each room. So a 30 min delay in the morning likely means I'm not showering, because I won't be late to my client's meeting. That bar of soap never lets me down, and I feel cleaner than with the liquid soap.
Aug 30, 2019, 10:20 am
#161
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 3,097
I'm picturing that scene in Pacific Heights where Michael Keaton is drilling and sawing and hammering in his rental unit, except he's in a hotel trying to break into the shampoo
Aug 30, 2019, 10:31 am
#162
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
A new superbug is being developed and soon it will jump out of your bulk soap/shampoo/conditioner, then after another a few generations of mutation a strain will emerge and it will grow teeth or enzymes to burrow thru your skin and the end will have arrived.
Sorry maybe that is why I find water good enough unless I'm covered is something really nasty and need a little something to break it loose.
Sorry maybe that is why I find water good enough unless I'm covered is something really nasty and need a little something to break it loose.
Water by itself doesn’t decrease bacterial count on skin surfaces anywhere close to as well as the use of warm high-pressure, soapy water derived from rather clean soap. Queue a lesson about ionization and phase behavior of fatty acids in water?
Aug 30, 2019, 10:44 am
#163
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,875
1) Public Restrooms and Airport lounge showers don't provide someone multiday private access in an entirely uncontrolled environment.
2) Nobody is talking about an epidemic. As I posted earlier in the thread, I think that 99.9% of the time there will be no issue at all. The whole objection is that when I go to a name brand hotel I don't want to have to wonder if I'm running in to that 0.1% situation.
2) Nobody is talking about an epidemic. As I posted earlier in the thread, I think that 99.9% of the time there will be no issue at all. The whole objection is that when I go to a name brand hotel I don't want to have to wonder if I'm running in to that 0.1% situation.
Aug 30, 2019, 10:47 am
#164
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,875
Undermining of infection prevention measures — and a move to manual-pump shared toiletry dispensers does that — means increased antibiotic use. And what does increased antibiotic use mean? It means more drug-resistant bacteria in an environment where investing in new antibiotics isn’t as productive as it used to be 40+ years ago.
Water by itself doesn’t decrease bacterial count on skin surfaces anywhere close to as well as the use of warm high-pressure, soapy water derived from rather clean soap. Queue a lesson about ionization and phase behavior of fatty acids in water?
Water by itself doesn’t decrease bacterial count on skin surfaces anywhere close to as well as the use of warm high-pressure, soapy water derived from rather clean soap. Queue a lesson about ionization and phase behavior of fatty acids in water?
Cleanliness is not next to godliness. And not a goal to be achieved by everyone.
As for "investing" in antibiotics, pharmaceuticals don't "invest" in things to help or be productive. They do it to make money. If there were money in it ...
Aug 30, 2019, 10:56 am
#165
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
With things people can tamper with who knows what could be in there. Urine, semen, fecal matter, acid, Nair, whatever. Yes, in 99.9% of cases there will probably be no issue, however there's plenty of sick people out there and I'm not really willing to risk it. Personally.