"Green Coal," created by torrefaction of wood biomass

CHAPEL HILL, NC -Integro Earth Fuels has raised $900,000 of an $8 million mixed securities offering for its green alternative to coal, according to a regulatory filing. The Chapel Hill-based company makes what it calls “Green Coal,” from wood biomass.

The company disclosed the raise in a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

The use of coal, particularly to fuel power plants, is a major contributor of CO2 emissions.

In 2007, coal powered 54 percent of the electric utilities in the United States and over 40 percent of the global electricity supply in 2005.  World marketed energy consumption is projected to increase by 50 percent from 2008 to 2030. Unfortunately, coal is also the largest single source of CO2 emissions thought to be the leading cause of global warming.

Twenty-eight states, including North Carolina, have passed legislation to reduce CO2 output from current levels to target levels over the next 10-12 years. On the national level, legislation regulating CO2 emissions is likely, although the recession and the recent shift of the US House to Republican control may delay that.

Torrified wood or biomass may be another way to go.

Torrefaction is a thermo-chemical process conducted in an inert gas atmosphere at temperatures of 485°F to 535°F (250°C-270°C) during which the biomass undergoes an extraordinary transformation that overcomes many of the constraints associated with co-firing. During torrefaction the molecular structure of wood is altered, enhancing some of the its physical properties.

Torrefied biomass  is a carbon-neutral feedstock sharing many of the properties of coal itself.  It does not take on water so it can be left uncovered like coal.  It can be treated, handled, and co-fired directly with coal. It has been tested to 10 percent and will likely go to a 30 percent mix with coal without negatively impacting electricity production.

Unlike carbon sequestration, which has an estimated capital cost of more than $1 billion, torrefied biomass requires little, if any, capital investment on the part of utilities. This fuel can be delivered below the cost of coal when carbon credits are a factor.  It would allow coal-fired utilities to meet the 2020 standards without a significant increase in the cost of electricity to consumers.

Richard Lepsinger

Many companies, start-ups in particular, are turning to virtual teams without brick and mortar headquarters.

While virtual companies that depend on technology instead of office space save greatly on overhead and burn rate, working in virtual teams has pitfalls outlined in Virtual Team Success: A Practical Guide for Working and Leading from a Distance by Rick Lepsinger and Dareleen DeRosa.

Yesterday, we offered a look at their thinking and lesson number one.  Here, including a reprise of Lesson one, are the other five lessons they offer for virtual teams.

Lesson #1: Focus on people issues. Essentially, successful teaming depends largely on the effective interaction of team members. Virtual teams need to compensate for the inherent lack of human contact by supporting team spirit, trust, and productivity. The authors identify warning signs that indicate that a team’s “people issues” need more attention.

“You may notice that team members work independently and do not reach out to other team members to collaborate,” says Lepsinger. “You may also notice that an ‘us versus them’ mentality has developed between locations or sub-groups. The truth is, when everyone is engaged and communicating, it is much easier to succeed as a virtual team. When team members build relationships with one another, it prevents people issues from taking over and impacting team efficiency.”

Lesson #1 in Action:

* Develop a team web page where virtual team members can share information and get to know one another.
* Create ways for team members to interact and communicate informally. Use real-time communication tools like Instant Messaging or social media sites such as Facebook or Twitter to create a virtual water cooler of sorts that allows people on virtual teams to communicate more spontaneously.
* Build a collective online “resource bank” to share information and experiences.
* Find ways to “spotlight” team members.
* Send electronic newsletters or updates to the team.
* Create ways to virtually celebrate successes as a team.
* Partner team members at different locations on projects and rotate these periodically.

Lesson #2: No trust, no team. Task-based trust is one of the factors that differentiated top performing teams. In virtual teams trust seems to develop more readily at the task level than at the interpersonal level. There are four warning signs that trust is in low supply in virtual teams: 1) team members do not refer to themselves as “we”; 2) they do not appear to know one another very well; 3) they are openly negative; and 4) they do not regard others as credible.

“If you want trust to develop among your team members, you have to set the foundation,” says DeRosa. “It doesn’t simply develop because a team has been working together for a while.”

Lesson #2 in Action:

* Make sure teams meet face-to-face at least once early on in the team’s formation. Spend some part of the meeting focused on building relationships and learning about team members’ capabilities.
* Be sure team members feel empowered to make and act on decisions. Because virtual leaders do not have “face time” with team members to check in, leaders are more likely to micromanage team members without realizing it.
* Help people manage conflicts, not avoid them. Conflict is likely to be ignored or may escalate quickly in a virtual setting. Therefore, leaders need to more proactively manage conflict.
* The team leader should model and reinforce these positive behaviors.

Lesson #3: “Soft” skills are essential. The presence of “soft” skills makes a difference in virtual team performance. Lepsinger and DeRosa found that virtual teams that have been through team-building and interpersonal skill development activities perform better than those that have not.

“Despite the strong link between training and virtual team performance, many organizations do not make this investment,” notes Lepsinger. “Another all-too-common practice is selecting team members based solely on their technical skills without considering key attributes like their interpersonal skills. The obvious solution is to include characteristics like effective communication and collaboration in the selection criteria.”

Lesson #3 in Action:

* Use criteria and/or assessments when selecting individuals for virtual teams.
* Use team-building sessions—ideally conducted at an initial or subsequent face-to-face team meeting—to help team members strengthen working relationships and create team momentum that can enhance team effectiveness.
* Assess development needs for team members and team leaders and conduct skill-building focused on these areas.
* Reassess needs over time.

Lesson #4: Watch out for performance peaks. While virtual teams who have been working together for more than three years tend to be more successful than teams working together for less time, many virtual teams face a performance peak around the one-year mark. After that, performance tends to level off or even decline.

“High performing virtual teams avoid this problem by implementing strategies to overcome this peak,” explains DeRosa. “When you see the warning signs of stagnant performance—team members get along well but do not produce results, there’s an apparent lack of direction, or team members don’t commit adequate time to the team—it’s time to take action.”

Lesson #4 in Action:

* Clearly define team roles and accountabilities to minimize frustration and misunderstandings that can damage morale and derail productivity.
* Review and refine team processes regularly.
* Periodically examine the level of team performance. Collect feedback from various stakeholders to assess the team’s performance.
* Based on the outcomes, identify barriers to high performance, as well as steps that can be taken to overcome these barriers.

Lesson #5: Create a “high touch” environment. Electronic technology has made virtual teaming possible, but it is not a perfect substitute for human interaction. One of the greatest performance barriers is the inability to replicate a high touch environment in a virtual setting. That’s why, in addition to figuring out ways to make virtual interaction more “human,” it’s critical that companies arrange for their virtual team members to meet in person at least once a year.

“Yes, they require time and expense, but virtual teams that invest in one or two such meetings per year perform better overall than those that do not,” says Lepsinger. “You’ll know you haven’t achieved a high touch environment with your virtual team if they communicate poorly, aren’t fully engaged, and don’t pay attention during virtual meetings.”

Lesson #5 in Action:

Leverage synchronous tools (e.g., Instant Messaging) to increase spontaneous communication.

Use tools such as electronic bulletin boards to create a sense of shared space.

Carefully choose communication technologies that are most appropriate to the specific task. For instance, email is good for simple information sharing, while conference calls are better suited for interactive sharing of ideas or plans.

Make wider use of videoconferencing. “Our survey data suggests that teams that use video technology perform better in general than those that do not,” says Lepsinger.

Lesson #6: Virtual team leadership matters. Leadership is the factor most important to the success of virtual teams. OnPoint’s study and other research shows that leadership does, in fact, have a statistically significant correlation with higher performance on virtual teams. To overcome the limitations of distance and to be fully effective, team leaders in a virtual environment must be especially sensitive to interpersonal communication and cultural factors.

There are four key warning signs that a team leader is not up to snuff: 1) the team is not meeting its performance objectives, and deliverables are delayed or of poor quality; 2) relationships between the team members and the leader aren’t strong; 3) the leader is not clear about the team’s direction or purpose; and 4) the team leader pays more attention to team members who are at his/her location or whom he/she gets along with.

“Organizations can avoid this performance barrier by selecting team leaders who not only have the necessary technical skills but also have the soft skills required to effectively lead in a virtual environment,” says DeRosa. “If you’re a team leader, it’s not easy to learn that you may be the cause of your team’s poor performance. But there are many ways to improve your performance and get your team back on track.”

Lesson #6 in Action:

* Set clear goals and direction and revisit these as priorities shift.
* Engage team members in the development of team strategy.
* Provide time for team building through periodic face-to-face meetings.
* Provide timely feedback to team members. Be responsive and accessible.
* Emphasize common interests and values and reinforce cooperation and trust.
* Create a system to easily integrate new team members.
* Teach the importance of conflict resolution.
* Celebrate team achievements and successes.

“We’ve seen too many well-intentioned companies fail because they treated their virtual teams the same way they treat their co-located teams,” says Lepsinger. “And then there are the organizations that start virtual teams in response to an opportunity or problem without planning or proper follow-up—never a recipe for success.”

“Organizations frequently set up virtual teams to address a particular business need,” concludes DeRosa. “However, they jump in without really understanding what they are getting themselves into. Simply put, better planning could dramatically improve their odds for success. Now, there is a formula for success. All today’s virtual teams must do is put it to work.”

Darleen DeRosa, Ph.D., is a managing partner at OnPoint Consulting. Darleen brings more twelve years of management consulting experience, with deep expertise in the areas of talent/succession management, executive assessment, virtual teams, and organizational assessment. Her client list includes Accenture, Bayer Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi-Sankyo, Gerdau Ameristeel, and Johnson & Johnson.

Richard Lepsinger is president of OnPoint Consulting and has a twenty-five-year track record of success as an organizational consultant and executive. His client list includes Bayer Pharmaceuticals, Citibank, Coca-Cola Company, ConocoPhillips, Goldman Sachs, Johnson & Johnson, NYSE Euronext, PeopleSoft, Prudential, and Subaru of America, among many others