Debating the Value of Green Hotels

So I responded to her article. A few others seem to have joined the conversation, including a thoughtful response from Heidi, the author. I still think Heidi is missing the point of my response, and maybe of the other responders. But you should take a look at the article and thread on green travel. And in the meantime, I'm going to use her reply on the thread as a discussion point here. Maybe we'll all learn a bit more from this kind of discussion.

My concern about the article was that a good premise -- traveling to distant locations, even if they are touted as green, isn't ecologically sound -- morphed it into bashing my site, and sites like it. My site isn't perfect -- and of course no listing site is. I feel that even the organizations that certify hotels miss the boat in lots of ways. But we all are trying, and that's where you start any change -- in action.

When Heidi started early in her reply with "The term 'guilt' was merely used to spark discussion" I felt she was missing my point. I personally like the challenge of the word "guilt". I don't know how the other responders reacted to the word, but I got the sense several of them didn't react to the word "guilt" so much as the concept of dissing efforts at trying to identify green hotels. At least in her reply she acknowledged what a challenge it is to compile a list of green hotels because information is so sparse about them.

Talking about easing our guilt with our various efforts is good. Do we buy green energy credits yet drive a large gas-hog car anyway, or do we buy those credits and drive a gas-conserving car? Do we use energy conserving appliances yet let the water run "endlessly", or do we conserve water through our appliance choice and actions? And do we travel "the world" staying at green hotels or non-green hotels? Every action helps, even if only a little.

So the reply starts with what her premise was -- "flying to remote locations to stay in ecolodges and whether we want to admit it or not, flying long distances does in fact raise climate change issues, period." Great start to an article. And good fodder for discussion about the challenges of being green and the choices we have to make every day. But then she slips right back into voicing her concerns about EnvironmentallyFriendlyHotels.com (EFH) with "What concerned me about the site is that it may be unintentionally misleading." And again I challenge her on her research. It seems she hasn't read the "About Us" link that talks about the intentions and challenges of this site, yet she voices concern about it being misleading.

More importantly, the premise of EFH has nothing to do with the premise of her article. It's starting to feel the article's title is merely a hook to get people to read her blog about how off-base EFH is and how wonderful other sites are. I have to question her intentions here, as well as her research and analysis.

She doesn't seem to like the green actions, or definitions of them, that we are using to identify how green a hotel is. We perfectly understand the daily choices we are faced with give us a continuum of options; some are greener than others but hopefully the at the end of the day the balance is greener than browner. We are hoping to spur people into action and into travelling with greater awareness.

Starting with her argument about our inclusion of Environmental Cleaning, which covers avoiding herbicides and pesticides too, she argues "An example is the use of cleaning chemicals which is an enormously complex area where rigorous standards are the only credible route to go." and continues with "I know there are no 'environmentally friendly chemicals' although some do have a better profile than others." We don't use the term chemicals in our description of environmental cleaning because we recognize there are lots of ways to clean and do so with environmental stewardship.

I've interacted with scientists on this subject too and have learned that some of the "bugs" we are trying to kill with our cleaning supplies can't be killed that way, and that some of the old fashioned approaches ultimately work as well for our basic cleaning needs as the harsh chemicals I campaign against. Being Green Seal certified isn't necessarily the answer because of the perfumes I've experienced in some of those products -- negatively impacting air quality. She's again jumped to conclusions about our intention based on her biases, not on her research. This is starting to get old, and we're not even done yet!

EFH has the primary focus of being for travelers who care about staying in green hotels. If a guest submits a hotel for inclusion we anticipate the information they share covers only the things they can see, not any back-of-house actions. But if a hotel submits itself, then we hope they know about their back-of-house actions. That accounts for some of the thin information we have -- guest vs hotel submitted properties. The lack of information hotels share about their green actions on their websites is another stumbling block in sharing complete and accurate information.

Guests can tell a lot about a hotel's green actions from the areas they experience. If a hotel is using perfumed cleaning supplies in the guestrooms or in the laundry, a chemically sensitive guest will know that. And we at EFH anticipate they'll report that when they submit a hotel for inclusion or review a hotel they found on the site. We share what we can, hoping it will make a difference to someone.

Heidi, if you know of shortcomings in our list of green hotels, why haven't you submitted information so we can update those hotels' listings? That's being a responsible green citizen. Wagging your finger saying you know something we don't know isn't helpful at all. That approach contributes to greenwashing in untold ways. We know we don't have sufficient data on many hotels and that some hotels are greenwashing. But it's up to the traveling public to fill us in to make the database more accurate. Taunting anyone trying to do a good deed just isn't helpful.

I appreciate the chance to talk about the greening of the hospitality industry. Though Heidi says she's just blogging and not a journalist, she's undermining her valuable point of view by blindly pointing fingers. If after she's really looked at EFH and disagrees with its premise, fine. But to say it's not as good as programs she has deemed to be valuable, without seemingly knowing much about any of the programs, smacks of prejudice and elitism. How can you really be a viable part of "the greenwash brigade" if you aren't researching your topic carefully? Are all of the blog posts on that site unfounded spouting and unresearched rants?

I too blog and voice my opinion, but when I write about something I take it upon myself to do a bit of research to base my opinion on. I don't want to be a Roseanne Roseannadanna or Emily Litella in my blogs. I strive to take an educated stance in my environmental education as I work toward greening the hospitality industry. I want hospitality venues to be Economically Sound in their actions as they weave their way through the myriad choices they face daily.