Show Posts
WPP abandoned its plans months ago as a minority partner in a california project and removed it from its business plans and website months ago. Our project pipeline is dynamic and shifts based on our ability to finance each opportunity and the overall terms and conditions presented.
It is absolutely typical in the energy business that only a percentage of all available projects in the pipeline are successfully implemented. Economic and political reasons can both have a large impact.
"and where does the exit on the stock exchange?" Please be more specific
It is absolutely typical in the energy business that only a percentage of all available projects in the pipeline are successfully implemented. Economic and political reasons can both have a large impact.
"and where does the exit on the stock exchange?" Please be more specific
Hi folks, I wrote the article here: https://www.nwengineeringllc.com/article/wpp-energy-scam.php
To the WPP folks, you were never part of any contract through the state of California. Your previous version of the white paper and your website claimed that you were the prime contractor on this project, yet you are not registered with the state of California, nor are you registered with the US federal government. You don't even have a DUNS number, which is the standard tracking number that every US state and the federal government uses to track information on registered contractors. How do I know this you ask? Because I've worked on US federal government contracts and I am currently registered. If you look on my website, you will find my DUNS and CAGE numbers and past contracts I have worked on. I searched the D&B system and you are not registered, therefore you were never involved in any government project. If you were, you would be registered, you would list these numbers on your website, and you would list your past performance on government projects with contract numbers and performance periods. You lied then and you are lying now.
Furthermore, why is a single company that is claiming to have been awarded $60 billion in government contracts (this is 1.5% of the 2018 US federal spending budget) doing an ICO? If you really had that much revenue, you wouldn't need to do an ICO. Just for perspective, Intel's 2017 revenue was about $60 billion. You literally claimed your company was as big as Intel, yet no one on this planet has ever heard of you.
Now let's get to this silly planned hydrogen power plant project. When one of the world's most prestigious engineering societies is still only talking about feasibility and at 10-20% of the generating capacity you claim, there is no way that you have magically managed to develop more advanced hydrogen generation capacity. Again, you're lying. You couldn't even list correct power generation units! It's laughable how badly you're lying.
1. You have stated “I looked into one of the municipal projects they listed in the whitepaper, specifically the California MSW project listed on the website and their whitepaper.
If the California municipal project were a real project, it would be registered in the California State Contracts Register.
This project does not exist in the California State Contracts Register.”
First, we never made a claim this was a State of California project. That is your assumption. This is a private project supplying electricity to a Municipal Water Authority with a PPA in place. We are intending to take over a power generation project that is already built and ultimately convert the project to a waste-to-energy facility using gasification. This would be a joint venture and we would be using an EPC that is well recognized and one of the leading Power Engineers. The technology would not be ours but licensed by the Joint Venture. We are very sorry that you misread that this was a Municipal project with the State of California or needing to be registered with the State of California. Actually, it is already a permitted facility. There is no State of California awarding of this project. For the record, we look to develop private projects and may take waste from a Municipality but again that does not need to be awarded by the State of California. We are not trying to educate you, but we are trying to get YOUR facts straight.
2. You have stated that Intel doesn’t have $60 Billion in revenue in 2017 so how can we make such claims. If you read carefully what we wrote you will see that we have been working for three years in conjunction with Joint Venture partners to develop a project in the DRC. That project includes a 35 year Power Purchase Agreement which amounts to $1.4 Billion a year in electric revenues. When you multiply that by 35 years you get $44 Billion. That was what our statement was all about. We have never claimed to have $60 Billion in revenue, but possibly you misread that statement also.
3. Last, we will not address technology we are developing with some of the leading engineering firms in the world. If you want to say that the Hydrogen technology you have read about on the Internet (you suggested the audience Google) cannot produce what we intend to produce, then that is your opinion which you are entitled to. Details of our R&D is Not Public Information. When we have news we believe we should release about our technologies and it is approved by SEC Counsel we will release such news.
Cheers.
1. That is exactly what you claimed. You can lie about it now but I read it in previous versions of your whitepaper. And what about the total in $60 billion on contracts with state governments and the federal government you claimed you had won? See, you never won any contracts with anyone. You are hyping up your company in an effort to scam unsophisticated people in the crypto community.
2. Again, I read this in previous versions of your whitepaper. You are lying. See my previous statement.
3. I have a hard time believing that a company that cannot quote power generation units correctly and does not understand the ideal gas law is at all involved in engineering anything related to alternative energy. And my contention that your "technology" is phony is not just my opinion. It is backed up by a study published in American Society of Mechanical Engineers conference proceedings. This is not me saying this, this is a peer-reviewed publication saying this. I am quoting them. This was not some magic act of Google, I cited the paper in my article! So no, it is not just my opinion.
