Pages:
Author

Topic: [ICO][E2C] - ELECTRONIC ENERGY COIN ✅ NEW TECHNOLOGY ✅ - page 21. (Read 70287 times)

newbie
Activity: 70
Merit: 0
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.

Wake up! it is not about energy or E2C or anything else. It's a scam, a big scam. It is run by a team called creator academy in Malaysia. since 2015 creator academy is actively scamming people by selling advertising campaigns or shares of companies that do not really exist. E2C is their latest scam. It is not about energy or cost efficiency, WAKE up....it's just something that seems interesting but in reality is either impossible or costs too much to be implemented. Anyhow, consider this: Everything creator academy has done turned into such a big scam, it started in UAE, then spread into Malaysia, Turkey and elsewhere.
Go and ask about creator academy from Malaysian Authorities and you will be amazed. So far all they have done was violations of several different laws and regulations in several countries.
just ask the Malaysian Authorities at www.sc.com.my

Where did u find such information?
Do u have any facts or is it only words ?
newbie
Activity: 70
Merit: 0
Did u make any interview with your CEO?
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.

Wake up! it is not about energy or E2C or anything else. It's a scam, a big scam. It is run by a team called creator academy in Malaysia. since 2015 creator academy is actively scamming people by selling advertising campaigns or shares of companies that do not really exist. E2C is their latest scam. It is not about energy or cost efficiency, WAKE up....it's just something that seems interesting but in reality is either impossible or costs too much to be implemented. Anyhow, consider this: Everything creator academy has done turned into such a big scam, it started in UAE, then spread into Malaysia, Turkey and elsewhere.
Go and ask about creator academy from Malaysian Authorities and you will be amazed. So far all they have done was violations of several different laws and regulations in several countries.
just ask the Malaysian Authorities at www.sc.com.my
Where is this information? Have you already been dealing with their projects?
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
Do you need to provide any documents for placing your product on your platform?               
member
Activity: 271
Merit: 10
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.

Wake up! it is not about energy or E2C or anything else. It's a scam, a big scam. It is run by a team called creator academy in Malaysia. since 2015 creator academy is actively scamming people by selling advertising campaigns or shares of companies that do not really exist. E2C is their latest scam. It is not about energy or cost efficiency, WAKE up....it's just something that seems interesting but in reality is either impossible or costs too much to be implemented. Anyhow, consider this: Everything creator academy has done turned into such a big scam, it started in UAE, then spread into Malaysia, Turkey and elsewhere.
Go and ask about creator academy from Malaysian Authorities and you will be amazed. So far all they have done was violations of several different laws and regulations in several countries.
just ask the Malaysian Authorities at www.sc.com.my


Is it like name of founder?
"creator academy"

What does it mean, these two words?
newbie
Activity: 24
Merit: 0
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.

Wake up! it is not about energy or E2C or anything else. It's a scam, a big scam. It is run by a team called creator academy in Malaysia. since 2015 creator academy is actively scamming people by selling advertising campaigns or shares of companies that do not really exist. E2C is their latest scam. It is not about energy or cost efficiency, WAKE up....it's just something that seems interesting but in reality is either impossible or costs too much to be implemented. Anyhow, consider this: Everything creator academy has done turned into such a big scam, it started in UAE, then spread into Malaysia, Turkey and elsewhere.
Go and ask about creator academy from Malaysian Authorities and you will be amazed. So far all they have done was violations of several different laws and regulations in several countries.
just ask the Malaysian Authorities at www.sc.com.my
newbie
Activity: 81
Merit: 0
Will people who have received a reverted link invite people as well?
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
Have u ever meet with your participation’s in real life?
What do you mean?
e2c
copper member
Activity: 98
Merit: 0
do you already have a testing platform?      
You will know more news if you start watching our social networks.
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
Will the list of major investors be published or only if they wish to do so?            
I think it needs to be done with the consent of everyone.
I think that in any case you need to ask permission. if an investor wants to remain incognito, then nobody can deprive him of this right
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.
But the main electricity in these countries is produced at thermal power plants or at nuclear power plants.
It only says that they are not interested in providing the product and introducing new energy technologies.


Today, thermal power plants consuming a huge batch of coal or natural gas cease to be cost-effective
Nuclear power plants also entail enormous costs in terms of uranium enrichment and the cost of a large number of workers.
But the introduction of new technologies is not cheap.
Also, maintenance of green energy requires the transfer of training of workers and the payment of their labor.
Nevertheless, the cost of implementing green energy by paying off will last for several years.
Why spend a lot of money for new develop, if so much cheaper to maintain in a good working condition existed?
implementation is possible and expensive, but the electricity produced by this environmentally friendly methods is cheaper.
It also doesn't danger the environment.
does not exhaust the earth's resources that are not renewable (coal, gas, oil)
But yet, the wind, solar or wind power plants are not as powerful as traditional power plants
they need enormous unoccupied areas.
Due to the presence of heat, atomic, and hydroelectric power plants, it can further affect the bio-balance of the earth

nobody will destroy the nuclear power plant, in order to build a wind power station in its place, especially since the nuclear power plant will not exceed any other power by its power.
yeah and due to devastating and catastrophic consequences, in the aftermath of the accident at the nuclear power plant also nothing will surpass.
newbie
Activity: 70
Merit: 0
Have u ever meet with your participation’s in real life?
newbie
Activity: 253
Merit: 0
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.
But the main electricity in these countries is produced at thermal power plants or at nuclear power plants.
It only says that they are not interested in providing the product and introducing new energy technologies.


Today, thermal power plants consuming a huge batch of coal or natural gas cease to be cost-effective
Nuclear power plants also entail enormous costs in terms of uranium enrichment and the cost of a large number of workers.
But the introduction of new technologies is not cheap.
Also, maintenance of green energy requires the transfer of training of workers and the payment of their labor.
Nevertheless, the cost of implementing green energy by paying off will last for several years.
Why spend a lot of money for new develop, if so much cheaper to maintain in a good working condition existed?
implementation is possible and expensive, but the electricity produced by this environmentally friendly methods is cheaper.
It also doesn't danger the environment.
does not exhaust the earth's resources that are not renewable (coal, gas, oil)
But yet, the wind, solar or wind power plants are not as powerful as traditional power plants
they need enormous unoccupied areas.
Due to the presence of heat, atomic, and hydroelectric power plants, it can further affect the bio-balance of the earth

nobody will destroy the nuclear power plant, in order to build a wind power station in its place, especially since the nuclear power plant will not exceed any other power by its power.
newbie
Activity: 253
Merit: 0
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.
But the main electricity in these countries is produced at thermal power plants or at nuclear power plants.
It only says that they are not interested in providing the product and introducing new energy technologies.


Today, thermal power plants consuming a huge batch of coal or natural gas cease to be cost-effective
Nuclear power plants also entail enormous costs in terms of uranium enrichment and the cost of a large number of workers.
But the introduction of new technologies is not cheap.
Also, maintenance of green energy requires the transfer of training of workers and the payment of their labor.
Nevertheless, the cost of implementing green energy by paying off will last for several years.
Why spend a lot of money for new develop, if so much cheaper to maintain in a good working condition existed?
implementation is possible and expensive, but the electricity produced by this environmentally friendly methods is cheaper.
It also doesn't danger the environment.
does not exhaust the earth's resources that are not renewable (coal, gas, oil)
But yet, the wind, solar or wind power plants are not as powerful as traditional power plants
they need enormous unoccupied areas.
Due to the presence of heat, atomic, and hydroelectric power plants, it can further affect the bio-balance of the earth
newbie
Activity: 253
Merit: 0
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.
But the main electricity in these countries is produced at thermal power plants or at nuclear power plants.
It only says that they are not interested in providing the product and introducing new energy technologies.


Today, thermal power plants consuming a huge batch of coal or natural gas cease to be cost-effective
Nuclear power plants also entail enormous costs in terms of uranium enrichment and the cost of a large number of workers.
But the introduction of new technologies is not cheap.
Also, maintenance of green energy requires the transfer of training of workers and the payment of their labor.
Nevertheless, the cost of implementing green energy by paying off will last for several years.
Why spend a lot of money for new develop, if so much cheaper to maintain in a good working condition existed?
implementation is possible and expensive, but the electricity produced by this environmentally friendly methods is cheaper.
It also doesn't danger the environment.
does not exhaust the earth's resources that are not renewable (coal, gas, oil)
But yet, the wind, solar or wind power plants are not as powerful as traditional power plants
they need enormous unoccupied areas.
newbie
Activity: 253
Merit: 0
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.
But the main electricity in these countries is produced at thermal power plants or at nuclear power plants.
It only says that they are not interested in providing the product and introducing new energy technologies.


Today, thermal power plants consuming a huge batch of coal or natural gas cease to be cost-effective
Nuclear power plants also entail enormous costs in terms of uranium enrichment and the cost of a large number of workers.
But the introduction of new technologies is not cheap.
Also, maintenance of green energy requires the transfer of training of workers and the payment of their labor.
Nevertheless, the cost of implementing green energy by paying off will last for several years.
Why spend a lot of money for new develop, if so much cheaper to maintain in a good working condition existed?
implementation is possible and expensive, but the electricity produced by this environmentally friendly methods is cheaper.
It also doesn't danger the environment.
does not exhaust the earth's resources that are not renewable (coal, gas, oil)
But yet, the wind, solar or wind power plants are not as powerful as traditional power plants
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.
But the main electricity in these countries is produced at thermal power plants or at nuclear power plants.
It only says that they are not interested in providing the product and introducing new energy technologies.


Today, thermal power plants consuming a huge batch of coal or natural gas cease to be cost-effective
Nuclear power plants also entail enormous costs in terms of uranium enrichment and the cost of a large number of workers.
But the introduction of new technologies is not cheap.
Also, maintenance of green energy requires the transfer of training of workers and the payment of their labor.
Nevertheless, the cost of implementing green energy by paying off will last for several years.
Why spend a lot of money for new develop, if so much cheaper to maintain in a good working condition existed?
implementation is possible and expensive, but the electricity produced by this environmentally friendly methods is cheaper.
It also doesn't danger the environment.
does not exhaust the earth's resources that are not renewable (coal, gas, oil)
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.
But the main electricity in these countries is produced at thermal power plants or at nuclear power plants.
It only says that they are not interested in providing the product and introducing new energy technologies.


Today, thermal power plants consuming a huge batch of coal or natural gas cease to be cost-effective
Nuclear power plants also entail enormous costs in terms of uranium enrichment and the cost of a large number of workers.
But the introduction of new technologies is not cheap.
Also, maintenance of green energy requires the transfer of training of workers and the payment of their labor.
Nevertheless, the cost of implementing green energy by paying off will last for several years.
Why spend a lot of money for new develop, if so much cheaper to maintain in a good working condition existed?
implementation is possible and expensive, but the electricity produced by this environmentally friendly methods is cheaper.
It also doesn't danger the environment.
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
I think this project would be cost-effective in eastern Europe, where green energy was not developed, and this market is not yet occupied by large corporations.
I don't agree with you, due to the fact that the countries of Eastern Europe are large suppliers of electricity to Western Europe.
But the main electricity in these countries is produced at thermal power plants or at nuclear power plants.
It only says that they are not interested in providing the product and introducing new energy technologies.


Today, thermal power plants consuming a huge batch of coal or natural gas cease to be cost-effective
Nuclear power plants also entail enormous costs in terms of uranium enrichment and the cost of a large number of workers.
But the introduction of new technologies is not cheap.
Also, maintenance of green energy requires the transfer of training of workers and the payment of their labor.
Nevertheless, the cost of implementing green energy by paying off will last for several years.
Why spend a lot of money for new develop, if so much cheaper to maintain in a good working condition existed?
implementation is possible and expensive, but the electricity produced by this environmentally friendly methods is cheaper.
newbie
Activity: 126
Merit: 0
Will the list of major investors be published or only if they wish to do so?            
I think it needs to be done with the consent of everyone.
Pages:
Jump to: