Next Article in Journal
Optimising Photovoltaic Farm Location Using a Capabilities Matrix and GIS
Previous Article in Journal
Scenario Analysis of an Electric Power System in Colombia Considering the El Niño Phenomenon and the Inclusion of Renewable Energies
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 15
Issue 18
10.3390/en15186679
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Influencing of the Building Energy Policies upon the Efficiency of Energy Consumption: The Case of Courthouse Buildings in South Korea

by
Acinia Nindartin
,
Hee-Woon Moon
,
Sang-Jun Park
,
Kyung-Tae Lee
,
Jin-Bin Im
* and
Ju-Hyung Kim
*
Department of Architectural Engineering, Hanyang University, Seoul 04763, Korea
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2022, 15(18), 6679; https://doi.org/10.3390/en15186679
Submission received: 3 August 2022 / Revised: 6 September 2022 / Accepted: 7 September 2022 / Published: 13 September 2022
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
As Korea has declared to realize a net-zero emission by 2050 in the Paris Agreement, the country has begun to implement national energy efficiency policies through the Green Standard for Energy and Environmental Design (G-SEED) certification and revision of building insulation thickness standard. However, some studies have reported the ineffectiveness of G-SEED certification and insulation thickness standard in reducing the energy consumption in certain buildings. Therefore, this study investigated the effectiveness of G-SEED certification and the revision of buildings’ insulation thickness standard, and evaluated the energy consumption of courthouse buildings. In addition, this study investigated the total annual energy consumption (electricity, gas, and heating energy) per gross floor area of courthouse buildings located in the central and southern regions of South Korea. Although many studies about the energy consumption analysis of non-residential buildings have been performed previously, a study evaluating the effectiveness of green certification and building insulation thickness standard on the energy consumption of courthouse buildings was performed for the first time. The results revealed that the revision of building insulation thickness standard and G-SEED certification resulted in an energy consumption efficiency of 34.61 and 31.14%, respectively. These results indicated the effectiveness of G-SEED certification and the revision of the building insulation thickness standard for enhancing energy efficiency in Korean courthouse buildings. However, some negative results were observed in the southern area, indicating that it is essential to increase the effectiveness of the building insulation thickness standard and G-SEED certification implementation.

1. Introduction

Climate change, global warming, gas emissions, and energy shortage are the most critical global environmental issues presently [1]. In 2018, Korea was ranked the third highest country in energy consumption per gross domestic product (GDP) among other International Energy Agency (IEA) member countries [2]. Owing to these environmental issues, countries globally, including Korea, declared the initiation of a net-zero emission by 2050 as per the Paris Agreement with an increase in energy consumption [3]. Among several sectors contributing to these global environmental issues, the building sector has been identified as a major contributor over the last decades [4]. Particularly, poorly planned buildings consume more energy [5], which can increase energy production demand and results in global warming and climate change. IEA [2] has reported the steady annual increase in the energy consumption of Korea’s buildings. Currently, existing buildings account for more than 30% of the total global energy consumption [6]. Therefore, the building sector exerts a large-scale effect on the total global energy consumption. As the building sector is largely responsible for global energy consumption, it is necessary and pivotal to analyze the energy consumption of buildings [7].
Public buildings, as well as residential buildings, consume enormous energy. In 2019, the Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction [8] revealed that public buildings contributed 8% of the total energy consumption of the building sector. Accordingly, the energy consumption of buildings has emerged as a genuine concern since 2002 [9], and it will continue to be in the future [10]. To reduce the energy consumption of buildings, Korea has implemented a building certification system known as the Green Standard for Energy and Environmental Design (G-SEED) as a certification mark for the performance of green building practices, and for providing rewards for buildings complying to this certification requirement [11]. One of the methods to accomplish this certification assessment is via the energy consumption analysis of buildings. Therefore, analyzing the energy consumption of Korean public buildings is essential to achieve the comprehensive implementation of national net-zero energy.
Previous studies have reported that high-level green building certification and building insulation thickness standard contribute to the minimization of the energy consumption of buildings; thus, this study focused on these two policies [12,13]. In Korea, despite the increasing popularity of G-SEED and building insulation thickness standard, there is a need to enhance the quality of these standards to fully realize national and international policies regarding the net-zero energy of buildings. Moreover, several studies have reported the inadequacy of green certification and revision of building insulation thickness standard in reducing the energy consumption of buildings. For example, a previous study reported that 28–35% of green commercial buildings in the United States utilized more energy than their non-green building counterparts [14]. For the insulation thickness standard, a previous study analyzed the effect of the revision of Korea’s building insulation thickness standard on the energy consumption of residential buildings, and found that the implementation of the revised building insulation thickness standard did not exert a decreasing effect on the gas energy consumption of these buildings [15]. Therefore, to confirm the effectiveness of G-SEED certification and the revision of the building insulation thickness standard, this study verified and analyzed the energy consumption of public government buildings. Moreover, as the nature of the system covers a wide range of buildings, studies on the verification of the effectiveness of the G-SEED certification and the revision of the building insulation thickness standard on the energy consumption of public government buildings in Korea are insufficient.
Most of recent references focused on green building system development rather than evaluating the actual energy consumption of green certified buildings. For example, improvement plans for the G-SEED certification of maintenance, re-maintenance, and existing buildings through an analysis of other domestic and foreign green certification systems have been carried out [16,17]. Analyzing the primary building materials to enhance the non-residential G-SEED certified building systems was also performed previously [18]. In addition, studies about building insulation thickness mostly inspected the optimum insulation thickness, which concentrated on a certain insulation thickness material, before simulating them into a model [19,20,21] rather than analyzing the energy consumption of buildings based on actual historical data to assess the effectiveness of insulation thickness. On top of that, many current studies are focused on analyzing the energy consumption of residential buildings. For example, Aydin et al. [22] investigated the optimum insulation thickness of residential buildings by lifecycle cost analysis in Turkey. Choi et al. [23] analyzed the energy consumption and CO2 emissions performance by comparing G-SEED certified against G-SEED non-certified apartments in Korea. Additionally, Kim and Park [24] investigated the G-SEED certification systems based on the energy consumption of G-SEED certified apartments. Although many studies about the energy consumption of non-residential buildings have been performed, a study about evaluating and assessing the energy consumption of green certificated buildings and insulation thickness standard within the courthouse buildings was performed for the first time. Furthermore, to obtain the reliable and solid results as each type of building has its own energy consumption pattern, analyzing the similar type of building is necessary [25]. Considering the prior recent studies, this paper evaluates whether or not the G-SEED certification and insulation thickness standard have achieved efficiency in energy consumption in Korean courthouse buildings.
Several national policies have been implemented to reduce the energy consumption of buildings [26,27,28]. For example, the G-SEED certification has been implemented to achieve the energy efficiency of buildings. Additionally, the application of the building insulation thickness standard to building envelopes can be used to further increase energy efficiency. G-SEED was implemented in 2002 [29] and the building insulation thickness standard was made mandatory in 1977 [30], and both standards have been actively continuously developed. For example, there was a policy amendment and revision of the building insulation thickness standard in 2017 [31]. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze and examine the effect of the revision of the building insulation thickness standard and G-SEED certification on the energy consumption of government courthouse buildings in Korea. More importantly, this study aimed to identify the effectiveness of the recent energy efficiency policies for future studies. To this end, the research questions (RQs) of this study are as follows:
  • RQ1: Do G-SEED certified courthouse buildings exhibit effectively reduced energy consumption compared with G-SEED non-certified courthouse buildings?
  • RQ2: Is the current revision of the building insulation thickness standard effective in reducing the energy consumption of courthouse buildings compared with the previous revision of the building insulation thickness standard?
This study is divided into five parts, including the introduction in Section 1, which explains the background and objectives of this study. Section 2 contains a review of the existing literature and standards, such as energy consumption analysis in public buildings, Korea’s G-SEED, and the revision of the building insulation thickness standard that can support the basis of this study. Section 3 includes the methodology of this study, which describes the consecutive steps employed in this study from data preparation to the analysis method used to achieve the study results. Section 4 present the results of the study, showing the findings of the analyzed data and the discussion of the results. Section 5 describes the conclusions of the analysis presented in previous sections and suggestions on important things observed in the study to be considered for further improvements.

2. Review of Existing Literature and Standards

2.1. Previous Studies on the Energy Consumption Analysis of Public Buildings

To improve the standard and policies, the analysis of the energy consumption of public buildings has emerged as a genuine concern and a crucial task owing to the significant energy-saving potential of public buildings. Public building energy consumption is defined as the energy consumption of air conditioning (A/C), heating, lighting, elevator, office equipment, and others, which utilize electrical, gas, and heating energy [13].
There are some factors affecting the energy consumption of buildings, such as the climate conditions in the geographic location of the building. The energy consumption of public buildings in severely cold regions has been analyzed, and the results have revealed that hotels, commercial, office, and school buildings exhibit the highest energy consumption [32]. In addition, economic analysis has revealed that centralized heating exhibits the largest energy cost. In addition to climatic factors, the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on changes in the energy consumption of public buildings has been investigated using statistic correlation analysis, and the results revealed that the electrical and gas energy consumption in most public buildings tends to decrease by an average rate of −4.46 and −10.35%, respectively [33].
The comparative energy consumption analysis of public buildings has been an active research topic in recent years. The energy consumption characteristics of buildings can be analyzed using statistical methods based on the types of public buildings to identify specific buildings with the highest energy consumption [34]. For example, green school building and non-green school buildings have been compared using statistics and analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine whether there is a significant difference, and the results revealed that green school buildings consumed 32% less energy compared with non-green school buildings [35]. Another study employed statistics to develop an energy efficiency benchmark using a case study approach, and found that university buildings with an energy consumption of 72.5 kWh/m2/year can be considered as an energy-efficient building [36]. In addition, the energy consumption of green public buildings has been evaluated, and G-SEED certified and G-SEED non-certified public buildings have been analyzed using comparative analysis based on data from an open public portal, and the results revealed that the energy consumption intensity of G-SEED certified public buildings was 35.5–48.9% lower than that of the non-certified counterparts [37].

2.2. Korea’s G-SEED

G-SEED was introduced in 2002 by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport (MOLIT) and the Ministry of Environment [29]. G-SEED is a representative green building certification system that assesses the performance of a building to reduce building-related environmental loads by reducing the energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions of the building, which can occur during the building’s life cycle [38].
The evaluation items and criteria of G-SEED are similar to that of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification of the United States [37,39]. The G-SEED certificate grades the energy efficiency of buildings into Green 1 to Green 4 based on derived scores. G-SEED assessment points areas are comprised of nine categories. Among the categories, a building with the highest point weight can be described as an energy-efficient building, and thus can be considered as a G-SEED building.
In addition, G-SEED provides some advantages to building owners, and a G-SEED certified building is expected to be a green building. In addition, buildings that are assigned as G-SEED certified or have achieved a high score in the energy performance evaluation will be granted with incentives, such as tax reductions, floor area ratio concession, and building height reduction by the government [40]. Studies on the analysis of the energy consumption of G-SEED certified buildings have been conducted previously, and have demonstrated the low energy consumption of these buildings. For example, Kim et al. reported that the energy-saving effect of G-SEED certified office buildings is 50% higher than that of G-SEED non-certified office buildings [11].
However, there are some obstacles that affect G-SEED evaluation. From an economic perspective, the application of the “Design Standards of Green Buildings” in residential buildings for G-SEED certification typically results in increased construction costs according to level-upgrade adjustments to achieve an excellent rating from G-SEED, but mandatory design items were reduced [41]. Additionally, from the perspective of building management, residential buildings become non-compliant to G-SEED certification when occupied by tenants despite the previous G-SEED certification of the building [42]. Therefore, there is a need to improve the G-SEED effectiveness in all perspectives to encourage building owners to pursue excellent G-SEED rating.

2.3. Revision of the Building Insulation Thickness Standard

Insulation of building envelopes is the most effective method to increase the thermal resistance and reduce the energy consumption for the cooling and heating of an internal area. It is one of the most essential features of building energy efficiency, which is a proven technology, and diverse insulation methods have been investigated to evaluate its performance, such as the environmental effects of insulation thickness and layer configuration [43]. Balancing the energy-saving effects requires the consideration of the appropriate selection of insulation material and implementation of the optimum insulation thickness [44]. Therefore, the building insulation thickness standard plays an important role in the energy consumption of buildings.
Korea’s national building insulation thickness standard was regulated in the ”Energy Conservation Design Criteria for Buildings” [11], and has been continuously strengthened until 2017. The revised standard was officially implemented in 2018 [45]. The details of the revision of the building insulation thickness standard are shown in Table 1 and Table 2. The insulation classification is divided into four grades (a, b, c, and d) based on the result of the thermal conductivity test of the insulation material, where grade ‘a’ to ‘d’ describes the smallest to the largest thermal conductivity values within a certain range [31]. The revision of the building insulation thickness standard affects buildings located in the central and southern areas of Korea. According to Table 1, all of the building insulation thickness standards of public buildings (non-residential) in the central area have been revised, except the ceiling of the highest level or roof of a building, which is directly exposed to the outside air. Moreover, as shown in Table 2, for buildings located in the southern area, the revision of the building insulation thickness standard only increased the thickness of the non-underfloor heating of the highest level of building, which is directly exposed to the outside air.
There are three classifications of the building insulation materials in Korea. The classifications of insulation materials that are often used in Korean buildings include organic (expanded polystyrene, extruded polystyrene, rigid urethane foam, phenolic foam) inorganic (glass wool, mineral wool), and composite (low emissivity) [46]. Moreover, along with the development of technology, there are various ways to reduce energy consumption. Rehman et al. [47] proved that inorganic salt hydrates and zeolite composites can improve the performance of solar heat storage using thermochemical heat storage systems (TCMs). The organic integration of conjugated monomer 3,6-dibromopyridazine (DBP) with carbon nitride containing urea precursor (CNU) can also improve the performance of the semiconductor in the solar energy by promoting the photoreduction of carbon dioxide (CO2) and hydrogen (H2) evolution from water [48].
The main purpose of the revision of the Korea’s building insulation thickness standard is to reduce the energy consumption of buildings. Choi et al. analyzed the impact of the revision of the building insulation thickness standard on the energy consumption of public buildings [49], and found that the energy consumption of Korean military barracks buildings in the central and southern areas decreased by 11% and 10%, respectively, after the implementation of the revised insulation thickness standard compared with buildings that applied the 1987 building insulation thickness standard. Therefore, continuous revision of the building insulation thickness standard is necessary to ensure the effectiveness of building energy efficiency.

3. Methodology

This study was conducted to analyze and examine the effectiveness of the revision of the building insulation thickness standard and G-SEED certification on the energy consumption of public government courthouse buildings. The steps followed in this study are shown in Figure 1. Prior to the data collection, previous literature was first reviewed to obtain the effect of G-SEED certification and the revision of the building insulation thickness standard on the energy consumption of public buildings, after which the review was summarized and used as a basis for the analysis of this study.
Next, the energy consumption data (gas, electricity, and heating) of Korean courthouse buildings in various regions were collected and organized based on the data classifications to achieve the goals of the study. To answer the research questions of this study, a comparative analysis was performed by plotting graphs and classifying the collected data. The impact of the revision of the building insulation thickness standard and G-SEED certification on the energy consumption of buildings was demonstrated by analyzing the collected data to achieve three aims: draw conclusions, achieve a comprehensive understanding, and suggest future policy improvements in building energy efficiency.

3.1. Data Collection

The data used in this study include the electrical, gas, and heating energy consumption data of buildings constructed before and after 2017. Table 3 shows the information of the research data that was analyzed and classified based on the following: year of completion of construction, G-SEED certified and G-SEED non-certified buildings, before and after the revision of the building insulation thickness standard, and GFA of the buildings in square meter (m2) unit. Six of the nine courthouse buildings have already achieved a G-SEED certificate (Grade Green 2) and three buildings were yet to obtain a G-SEED certificate. These nine buildings are located in the central and southern areas, and were also classified based on “before and after the revision of building insulation thickness standard”.

3.2. Data Conversion

The most consumed energy of the buildings includes gas, electrical, and heating energy. Therefore, in this research, data for the consumed gas, electrical, and heating energy were collected and analyzed using comparative analysis based on the classification of the courthouse buildings located in the central and southern areas. Energy consumption data include monthly electrical, gas, and heating energy consumption for 2021. The actual obtained total energy consumption data of each building were defined into three units, which are shown in Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6. The units of each energy consumption include kilowatt-hour (kWh) for electricity, mega-joule (MJ) for gas, and giga-calorie (GCal) for heating energy.
For the comparative analysis of energy consumption, all obtained gas and heating energy data were converted into a single kWh unit; according to the requirement of the United Nations [50], the unit of energy consumption of the heating (1 kWh = 0.00086 Gcal) and gas (1 kWh = 3.6 MJ) energy was converted to kWh. Therefore, before the data were analyzed, all of the gas (MJ) energy and heating (Gcal) energy values were converted into kWh. Subsequently, the total energy consumption per GFA (kWh/m2) every month was analyzed through comparative analysis. The converted total energy consumption of each Korean courthouse building for comparative analysis in this study is shown in Table 7, Table 8 and Table 9.

4. Results

4.1. Effect of the Revision of Building Insulation Thickness Standard

The revision of the insulation thickness standard contains the increase in insulation thickness building envelopes. The results revealed that increasing the insulation thickness contributed to the energy consumption efficiency of the Korean courthouses buildings, as shown in the comparison graph in Figure 2. The dotted lines in Figure 2 represent the energy consumption of the buildings constructed prior to the revision of the building insulation thickness standard, and the solid lines represent the energy consumption of buildings constructed after the revision. The gray lines (both dotted and solid lines), which represent the buildings in the central area, revealed that the increase in the building insulation thickness significantly contributed to the energy efficiency of the buildings (particularly at the beginning of the year from January to April), although the provided efficiency was high during the summer season. Figure 3 shows the bar chart of the comparison of the energy consumption of the courthouse buildings in the central regions. Generally, as shown in Figure 3, the increase in the building insulation thickness effectively enhanced the energy consumption of courthouse buildings.
Based on Table 1 and Table 2, there were major revisions to the standard thickness for buildings in the central regions. Meanwhile, the revisions for the non-residential building in the southern regions were minor. Before the revision, we can see that the energy consumption of the courthouse buildings is fairly high compared with that after the revision. The results of this study also illustrate that the thickness of building insulation plays a major role in increasing room temperature during cold weather; as we can see in Figure 2, the comparison of energy consumption before and after revision in the central regions is significantly different in the cold weather (the first months of the year). In contrast, the minor revisions for the southern region’s buildings are slightly effective in August. It can be seen that the differences in building insulation thickness result in dissimilar energy consumption of courthouse buildings.
The blue lines (both dotted and solid lines) in the image represent the buildings in the southern area, which reflects the positive impact of the revision of building insulation thickness standard on the energy consumption of courthouse buildings in this area. However, compared with the increase in the energy consumption efficiency of the courthouse buildings during winter, the efficiency in January and December decreased. As shown in Figure 4, in the winter season, courthouse buildings that implemented the revised insulation thickness standard consumed 8.51 and 10.62 kWh/m2 of energy in December and January, respectively, whereas buildings where the standard was not applied consumed 7.23 and 9.78 kWh/m2 of energy, respectively. These results indicated that the revision of the building insulation thickness standard was not very effective for buildings in the southern area, particularly in the winter season from December to January.

4.2. Effect of G-SEED Certification

G-SEED certified buildings exhibited effective energy consumption compared with the non-certified buildings. Figure 5 illustrates the positive effects of the G-SEED certification for reducing the energy consumption of buildings in the central area (the gray lines). However, in the summer season, the energy consumptions of the G-SEED certified buildings in the southern area (the blue lines) were higher than those of non-certified buildings. These findings indicated that the G-SEED assessment process in the southern area did not consider the energy consumption during the summer season.
Figure 6 and Figure 7 show bar charts showing the comparison between the energy consumption of G-SEED certified (blue) and G-SEED non-certified (orange) buildings. In the central region (Figure 6), the monthly energy consumption of the G-SEED certified buildings was satisfactory. As shown in Figure 7, the energy consumptions of the G-SEED non-certified buildings in the southern areas from June to August were 5.56, 9.06, and 11.63 kWh/m2, respectively, and 6.68 kWh/m2 in December. However, those of the G-SEED certified buildings from June to August were 9.29, 13.29, and 13.33 kWh/m2, consecutively, and 8.15 kWh/m2 in December. These results indicated the ineffective energy consumption of the G-SEED certified buildings in the Southern area from June to August and in December.

4.3. Comparison of the Energy Efficiency

The monthly energy consumption of courthouse buildings that implement the revised building insulation thickness standard and have G-SEED certification was calculated. The calculation results were compared to those of buildings that did not implement the revised building insulation thickness standard and are G-SEED non-certified to obtain the energy-efficiency percentage.
The result of this research revealed that both G-SEED certification and the revision of the building insulation thickness standard contributed positively to the energy consumption efficiency of courthouse buildings annually. Table 10 shows that the revision of the building insulation thickness standard and G-SEED certification was effective for the reduction in the annual energy consumption of courthouse buildings located in the central area compared with courthouse buildings in the southern area. The negative values depicted a contradiction of the expected result. The overall column shows the effects of the revision of the building insulation thickness standard and G-SEED certification implementation on the energy efficiency of all the buildings located in both the central and southern regions. In addition, the results verified that the G-SEED certification of buildings in the southern area cannot guarantee efficient energy consumption, as it only resulted in an energy consumption efficiency of 10.44%. This result is closely related to the findings of Menassa et al. [51], who found that the electrical energy saving of some United States Navy LEED-certified buildings was only 15% less than that of their non-certified counterparts per year. In conclusion, this study revealed that the highest energy-saving outcome both from G-SEED certified buildings and buildings that implemented the revised building insulation thickness standard was observed in February, March, and April. Although negative values were observed in certain seasons, the adequacy of G-SEED certification and the revision of building insulation thickness standard can potentially decrease the energy consumption of courthouse buildings in Korea.

5. Discussion

The analysis and examination of the effectiveness of the revised building insulation thickness standard revealed its ineffectiveness for the reduction of the energy consumption of courthouse buildings located in the southern areas during the winter season. This was attributed to the fact that there was no revision for the insulation thickness standard for non-residential buildings in the southern areas, except areas of the highest-level floor, which applied non-underfloor heating building (the thickness is 150 mm and then was changed into 155 mm), directly exposed to the outside air (Table 2). A previous study revealed that, to reduce heating and A/C energy consumption, increasing the thickness of the insulation layer is a direct method to improve the thermal qualities of the external wall of public buildings [52]. Therefore, it is imperative to consider and evaluate the insulation thickness standard not only for residential buildings, but also for non-residential buildings, particularly in the southern areas, which exhibit high energy consumption in the winter season. Moreover, the recent insulation thickness standard for non-residential buildings must be a concern to minimize building energy consumption comprehensively.
Additionally, in the summer season, the G-SEED certified buildings in southern areas consumed more energy compared with G-SEED non-certified buildings, and can only save less than 15% energy per year. Further, compared with the G-SEED non-certified buildings, the G-SEED-certified buildings utilized more energy from June to August. As the climate of the southern area is warmer than that of the central area, the result of the analyzed data indicated that the energy consumption of the G-SEED-certified buildings increased in the summer season. A previous study observed that the green university buildings in southeast Australia are more likely to be set up a warm environment [53]. This indicates that the energy consumption of the G-SEED-certified courthouse buildings in southern areas during the summer season can be attributed to the potentially high utilization of A/C during this season. During the summer season, the behavior of the occupants of a building will change because of a high indoor temperature. Occupants will generally use A/C at 30 °C and turn it off at 26.9 °C. In Korea, the indoor temperature is relatively higher than the temperature people are comfortable with, which increases the use of A/C, particularly in office buildings as electrical fees are provided by the employers [54]. In addition, the work productivity of occupants in Korea office buildings can be affected by the work environment, which includes indoor temperature, and maximum productivity occurs at a certain temperature [55]. Therefore, the results of this study may indicate that occupants in the southern courthouse buildings prioritize the comfort temperature of their work environment regardless of the “G-SEED-certified building” label.
It could be suggested that the controversial results for the energy consumption of courthouse buildings in this case study may have been triggered by the poor green building management in the actual operation after the complete construction of the buildings. As there are relations between occupants’ workplace culture and the energy consumption of buildings, it is essential to consider the post-occupancy evaluation of buildings [56]. Additionally, when comparing certified green buildings against the non-certified buildings, occupants’ awareness is an important factor to consider and selecting the random occupants in the green building assessment process may give unbiased results [57].

6. Conclusions

In order to improve the national building energy efficiency policies comprehensively such as green building certification and insulation thickness standard building, it is crucial to evaluate the energy consumption of public government buildings, which are classified as non-residential buildings. In this study, a comparative analysis of the monthly electrical, gas, and heating energy consumption of nine courthouse buildings in 2021 was performed to investigate the energy efficiency of courthouse buildings in the central and southern region of South Korea. The analysis of the energy consumption parameters was based on compliant and non-compliant to G-SEED certification, and the construction of building prior to and after the 2017 revision of the building insulation thickness standard. This study was conducted to answer the following research questions: whether G-SEED certification and the revision of the building insulation thickness standard are genuinely effective for reducing the energy consumption of courthouse buildings.
Generally, the results of this study verified that G-SEED certification and the revision of building insulation thickness standard are quite effective for reducing the energy consumption of courthouse buildings. The results revealed that the revision of building insulation thickness standard resulted in an energy consumption efficiency of 27.19 and 16.32% in the central and the southern area, respectively, which is a total of 34.61% per annum. In addition, G-SEED-certified buildings in the central and southern area exhibited energy saving of 37.98 and 10.44%, respectively, which is a total of 31.14% per annum. These results indicate that the energy consumption of courthouse buildings, which are classified as public government buildings, can be a good representative and example for the private sector. Particularly, for the implementation of national energy efficiency policies, as Chung et al. [58] reported the decline in the energy efficiency of private office buildings over the years.
In addition, the results of this study revealed the dissimilarity in the energy consumption patterns of each region owing to climate and location factors, such as temperature, humidity, and altitude [59,60,61]. Accordingly, future studies should analyze the coefficient between regional or location factors in order to reduce the energy consumption of non-residential buildings with the aim to maximize the effectiveness of the building insulation thickness standard and G-SEED certification implementation. Moreover, this study is limited as it is only focused on the GFA parameter and does not consider other parameters that affect energy consumption. Hence, further studies should include other parameters, such as temperature, number of floors and occupants, and occupant behaviors, as these parameters are essential for the analysis of the energy consumption of private and public buildings.
Other than that, this study is limited to only being focused on the evaluation of actual energy consumption of courthouse buildings. There is a lack of data about the insulation materials that were applied in the Korean courthouse buildings. As every insulation material has different characteristics of thermal conductivity and volumetric heat capacity and these thermophysical properties strongly influence the energy performance [62], further studies are needed, especially for the most suitable insulation materials of government public buildings, which can be implemented for further energy efficiency policies and standard improvements. In addition, this study has limitation that didn’t consider cost efficiency [63,64]. Considering energy resource economics and cost-benefit will be needed for further studies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.N. and H.-W.M.; methodology, J.-B.I.; software, S.-J.P.; validation, J.-H.K. and J.-B.I.; formal analysis, A.N.; resources, H.-W.M.; data curation, K.-T.L.; writing—original draft preparation, A.N.; writing—review and editing, J.-B.I.; visualization, A.N.; supervision, J.-H.K.; project administration, J.-B.I. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the study are proprietary or confidential in nature and may only be provided with restrictions.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References

  1. Pierrehumbert, R. There is no Plan B for dealing with the climate crisis. Bull. At. Sci. 2019, 75, 215–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. IEA. International Energy Agency Report: Korea 2020 Energy Policy Review. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/korea-2020 (accessed on 10 April 2022).
  3. Oh, H.; Hong, I.; Oh, I. South Korea’s 2050 Carbon Neutrality Policy. East Asian Policy 2021, 13, 33–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Aldossary, N.A.; Rezgui, Y.; Kwan, A. Energy consumption patterns for domestic buildings in hot climates using Saudi Arabia as case study field: Multiple case study analyses. J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 2014, 2014, 1986–1993. [Google Scholar]
  5. Zhou, Z.; Wang, C.; Sun, X.; Gao, F.; Feng, W.; Zillante, G. Heating energy saving potential from building envelope design and operation optimization in residential buildings: A case study in northern China. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 174, 413–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Edenhofer, O. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2015; Volume 3, p. 22. [Google Scholar]
  7. Pérez-Lombard, L.; Ortiz, J.; Pout, C. A review on buildings energy consumption information. Energy Build. 2008, 40, 394–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Global ABC. Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction; Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction: Paris, France, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  9. Laustsen, J. Energy Efficiency Requirements in Building Codes, Energy Efficiency Policies for New Buildings; IEA Information Paper; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  10. Allouhi, A.; El-Fouih, Y.; Kousksou, T.; Jamil, A.; Zeraouli, Y.; Mourad, Y. Energy consumption and efficiency in buildings: Current status and future trends. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 109, 118–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kim, J.H.; Kim, J.H. A study on the comparison for energy consumption characteristics between G-SEED certified and non-certified office. J. Acad. Ind. Coop. Soc. 2019, 20, 33–43. [Google Scholar]
  12. Ibrahim, M.; Ghaddar, N.; Ghali, K. Optimal location and thickness of insulation layers for minimizing building energy consumption. J. Build. Perform. Simul. 2012, 5, 384–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Scofield, J.H. Efficacy of LEED-certification in reducing energy consumption and greenhouse gas emission for large New York City office buildings. Energy Build. 2013, 67, 517–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Newsham, G.R.; Mancini, S.; Birt, B.J. Do LEED-certified buildings save energy? Yes, but…. Energy Build. 2009, 41, 897–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kim, J.; Chun, J.; Lee, B. Study about change of insulation standard in apartment in its effect. J. Archit. Inst. Korea 2009, 11, 125–132. [Google Scholar]
  16. Lee, Y.; Lee, K. An analysis of the improvement measures of the certification system through G-SEED research trend analysis. J. Reg. Assoc. Archit. Inst. Korea 2021, 23, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  17. Hyun, E.M.; Lee, J.E.; An, K.H. A study on improvement direction of G-SEED for existing buildings. J. Archit. Inst. Korea Struct. Constr. 2018, 34, 59–67. [Google Scholar]
  18. Lim, H.; Tae, S.; Roh, S. Analysis of the primary building materials in support of G-SEED life cycle assessment in South Korea. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Landuyt, L.; De, T.S.; Laverge, J.; Steeman, M.; Van, D.B. Balancing environmental impact, energy use and thermal comfort: Optimizing insulation levels for The Mobble with standard HVAC and personal comfort systems. Build. Environ. 2021, 206, 108307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Annibaldi, V.; Cucchiella, F.; De, B.P.; Rotilio, M.; Stornelli, V. Environmental and economic benefits of optimal insulation thickness: A life-cycle cost analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 116, 109441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Arslanoglu, N.; Yigit, A. Investigation of efficient parameters on optimum insulation thickness based on theoretical-Taguchi combined method. Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy 2017, 36, 1824–1831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Aydin, N.; Biyikoğlu, A. Determination of optimum insulation thickness by life cycle cost analysis for residential buildings in Turkey. Sci. Technol. Built Environ. 2021, 27, 2–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Park, J.H.; Cha, G.W.; Hong, W.H. The evaluation of energy consumption and CO2 emission on green building certification apartments in Korea. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2014, 525, 384–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kim, H.; Park, W. A study of the energy efficiency management in green standard for energy and environmental design (G-SEED)-certified apartments in South Korea. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Li, M.; Shi, J.; Guo, J.; Cao, J.; Niu, J.; Xiong, M. Climate impacts on extreme energy consumption of different types of buildings. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0124413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Seoul Metropolitan Government Ordinance on the Support for Construction of Green Buildings. Available online: https://legal.seoul.go.kr/legal/english/front/page/law.html?pAct=lawView&pPromNo=2490#nolink (accessed on 15 April 2022).
  27. Korea Energy Agency. Available online: https://dco.energy.or.kr/renew_eng/energy/buildings/buildings.aspx (accessed on 16 April 2022).
  28. Geller, H.; Harrington, P.; Rosenfeld, A.H.; Tanishima, S.; Unander, F. Polices for increasing energy efficiency: Thirty years of experience in OECD countries. Energy Policy 2006, 34, 556–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Mok, S.S.; Cho, D.W.; Park, A.R. A comparative study on office building criteria between G-SEED and LEED. KIEAE J. 2014, 14, 59–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Evans, M.; Chon, H.; Shui, B.; Lee, S.E. Country Report on Building Energy Codes in Republic of Korea; Pacific Northwest National Laboratory: Richland, WA, USA, 2009; pp. 1–26. [Google Scholar]
  31. MOLIT. Ministry of Land Infrastructure and Transport Act Website. 2017. Energy Conservation Design Criteria for Buildings Act. Available online: https://www.law.go.kr/ (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  32. Qu, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, H.; Yang, F. Energy consumption analysis of public buildings located in the severe cold region. Procedia Eng. 2017, 205, 2111–2117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kang, H.; An, J.; Kim, H.; Ji, C.; Hong, T.; Lee, S. Changes in energy consumption according to building use type under COVID-19 pandemic in South Korea. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 148, 111294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Yan, H.; Ding, G.; Cheng, Y.; Zhang, L.; Li, H. Analysis on public building energy consumption based on actual data: Take 18 buildings in Shenzhen for example. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Construction and Real Estate Management, Guangzhou, China, 10–12 November 2017; pp. 128–138. [Google Scholar]
  35. Shrestha, P.P.; Pushpala, N. Comparative analysis of energy consumption of green and non-green school buildings. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Design and Construction, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 13–15 July 2011; pp. 248–254. [Google Scholar]
  36. Shukri, M.A.; Jailani, J.; Hauashdh, A. Benchmarking the Energy Efficiency of Higher Educational Buildings: A Case Study Approach. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2022, 12, 491–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. No, S.; Won, C. Comparative analysis of energy consumption between Green Building Certified and Non-Certified Buildings in Korea. Energies 2020, 13, 1049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. KEITI. Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute Website. Available online: https://www.gbc.re.kr/index.do (accessed on 15 April 2022).
  39. Wang, S.Y.; Lee, K.T.; Kim, J.H. Green Retrofitting Simulation for Sustainable Commercial Buildings in China using a Proposed Multi-Agent Evolutionary Game. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kim, K.H.; Jeon, S.S.; Irakoze, A.; Son, K.Y. A study of the green building benefits in apartment buildings according to real estate prices: Case of non-capital areas in South Korea. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kim, M.Y.; Kim, H.G. Analysis of Construction Cost of Energy Performance by Apartment Size according to Seoul Green Building Design Guide and G-SEED Revision. J. KIAEBS 2018, 12, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
  42. Kim, H.M.; Park, W.J. A comparison analysis on the changes in energy efficiency of the G-SEED certified apartment buildings. J. Reg. Assoc. Archit. Inst. Korea 2016, 18, 171–182. [Google Scholar]
  43. Dombaycı, Ö.A. The environmental impact of optimum insulation thickness for external walls of buildings. Build. Environ. 2007, 42, 3855–3859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Huang, H.; Zhou, Y.; Huang, R.; Wu, H.; Sun, Y.; Huang, G.; Xu, T. Optimum insulation thicknesses and energy conservation of building thermal insulation materials in Chinese zone of humid subtropical climate. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 52, 101840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. ISOVER Korea. Available online: https://www.isover.co.kr/jaryosil/regulation/energyefficiency_thickness (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  46. Wi, S.; Park, J.H.; Kim, Y.U.; Yang, S.; Kim, S. Thermal, hygric, and environmental performance evaluation of thermal insulation materials for their sustainable utilization in buildings. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 272, 116033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Rehman, A.U.; Shah, M.Z.; Rasheed, S.; Afzal, W.; Arsalan, M.; Rahman, H.U.; Ullah, M.; Zhao, T.; Ullah, I.; Din, A.U.; et al. Inorganic salt hydrates and zeolites composites studies for thermochemical heat storage. Z. Für Phys. Chem. 2021, 235, 1481–1497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Hayat, A.; Taha, T.A.; Alenad, A.M.; Yingjin, L.; Mane, S.K.; Hayat, A.; Khan, M.; Rehman, A.U.; Khan, W.U.; Shaishta, N. Organic conjugation of polymeric carbon nitride for improved photocatalytic CO2 conversion and H2 fixation. Energy Technol. 2021, 9, 2100091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Choi, D.S.; Do, J.S.; Jeon, H.C. A study on the variation of energy consumption in military barracks through insulation standard. J. Korean Soc. Living Environ. Sys. 2021, 28, 466–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. United Nations. International Recommendations for Energy Statistics (IRES) Handbook; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2017; p. 149. [Google Scholar]
  51. Menassa, C.; Mangasarian, S.; El-Asmar, M.; Kirar, C. Energy consumption evaluation of US Navy LEED-certified buildings. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 2012, 26, 46–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Huang, J.; Lv, H.; Gao, T.; Feng, W.; Chen, Y.; Zhou, T. Thermal properties optimization of envelope in energy-saving renovation of existing public buildings. Energy Build. 2014, 75, 504–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Paul, W.L.; Taylor, P.A. A comparison of occupant comfort and satisfaction between a green building and a conventional building. Build. Environ. 2008, 43, 1858–1870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Bae, C.; Chun, C. Research on seasonal indoor thermal environment and residents’ control behavior of cooling and heating systems in Korea. Build. Environ. 2009, 44, 2300–2307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Kim, H.; Hong, T. Determining the optimal set-point temperature considering both labor productivity and energy saving in an office building. Appl. Energy 2020, 276, 115429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Brown, Z.; Cole, R.J.; Robinson, J.; Dowlatabadi, H. Evaluating user experience in green buildings in relation to workplace culture and context. Facilities 2010, 28, 225–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Amiri, A.; Ottelin, J.; Sorvari, J. Are LEED-certified buildings energy-efficient in practice? Sustainability 2019, 11, 1672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Chung, W.; Hui, Y.V. A study of energy efficiency of private office buildings in Hong Kong. Energy Build. 2009, 41, 696–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Huang, J.; Gurney, K.R. The variation of climate change impact on building energy consumption to building type and spatiotemporal scale. Energy 2016, 111, 137–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Mirrahimi, S.; Mohamed, M.F.; Haw, L.C.; Ibrahim, N.L.; Yusoff, W.F.; Aflaki, A. The effect of building envelope on the thermal comfort and energy saving for high-rise buildings in hot–humid climate. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 53, 1508–1519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Katsoulakos, N.M.; Kaliampakos, D.C. What is the impact of altitude on energy demand? A step towards developing specialized energy policy for mountainous areas. Energy Pol. 2014, 71, 130–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Long, L.; Ye, H. The roles of thermal insulation and heat storage in the energy performance of the wall materials: A simulation study. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 24181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kim, H.S.; Im, J.B.; Lee, K.T.; Kim, H.J.; Kim, J.H. Proposals for Feasibility Study and Optimal Combination of Renewable Energy Generation Systems in Baengnyeongdo and Oedo using HOMER. J. Archit. Inst. Korea 2021, 37, 347–356. [Google Scholar]
  64. Quan, J.; Kim, S.H.; Kim, J.H. A study on probabilistic social cost-benefit analysis to introduce high-efficiency motors into subway station ventilation. Energy Policy 2017, 121, 92–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Energies 15 06679 g001 550
Figure 1. Research flowchart.
Figure 1. Research flowchart.
Energies 15 06679 g001
Energies 15 06679 g002 550
Figure 2. Line chart of the energy consumption of the courthouse buildings based on region and the revision of the building insulation thickness standard.
Figure 2. Line chart of the energy consumption of the courthouse buildings based on region and the revision of the building insulation thickness standard.
Energies 15 06679 g002
Energies 15 06679 g003 550
Figure 3. Bar chart of the monthly energy consumption of courthouse buildings in the central region based on the revision of the building insulation thickness standard.
Figure 3. Bar chart of the monthly energy consumption of courthouse buildings in the central region based on the revision of the building insulation thickness standard.
Energies 15 06679 g003
Energies 15 06679 g004 550
Figure 4. Bar chart of the monthly energy consumption of courthouse buildings in the southern region based on the revision of the building insulation thickness standard.
Figure 4. Bar chart of the monthly energy consumption of courthouse buildings in the southern region based on the revision of the building insulation thickness standard.
Energies 15 06679 g004
Energies 15 06679 g005 550
Figure 5. Line chart of the energy consumption of the courthouse buildings based on region and G-SEED certification.
Figure 5. Line chart of the energy consumption of the courthouse buildings based on region and G-SEED certification.
Energies 15 06679 g005
Energies 15 06679 g006 550
Figure 6. Bar chart of the monthly energy consumption of the courthouse buildings in the central region based on G-SEED certification.
Figure 6. Bar chart of the monthly energy consumption of the courthouse buildings in the central region based on G-SEED certification.
Energies 15 06679 g006
Energies 15 06679 g007 550
Figure 7. Bar chart of the monthly energy consumption of the court house buildings in the southern region based on G-SEED certification.
Figure 7. Bar chart of the monthly energy consumption of the court house buildings in the southern region based on G-SEED certification.
Energies 15 06679 g007
Table
Table 1. 2017 revision of the building insulation thickness standard for the central region buildings.
Table 1. 2017 revision of the building insulation thickness standard for the central region buildings.
Category of Building EnvelopesBefore RevisionAfter Revision
Allowed Thickness (mm)Allowed Thickness (mm)
abcdabcd
WallsDirect outside exposureNon-residential buildings125145165185135155180200
Residential buildings155180210130190225260285
Indirect outside exposureNon-residential buildings8510011512590105120135
Residential buildings105120140155130155175195
Ceilings of the highest level or roofDirect exposure to the outside air180220260295330220260295
Indirect exposure to the outside air120145170195220155180205
Floors of the highest levelDirect outside exposureUnderfloor heating175205235260190220255280
Non-underfloor heating150175200220165195220245
Indirect outside exposureUnderfloor heating115135155170125150170185
Non-underfloor heating105125140155110125145160
Table
Table 2. 2017 revision of the building insulation thickness standard for the southern region buildings.
Table 2. 2017 revision of the building insulation thickness standard for the southern region buildings.
Category of Building EnvelopesBefore RevisionAfter Revision
Allowed Thickness (mm)Allowed Thickness (mm)
abcdabcd
WallsDirect outside exposureNon-residential buildings100115130145100115130145
Residential buildings125145165185145170200220
Indirect outside exposureNon-residential buildings6575909565759095
Residential buildings8095110120100115135150
Ceilings of the highest level or roofDirect exposure to the outside air180215245270180215245270
Indirect exposure to the outside air120145165180120145165180
Floors of the highest levelDirect outside exposureUnderfloor heating140165190210140165190210
Non-underfloor heating130150175195130155175195
Indirect outside exposureUnderfloor heating9511012514095110125140
Non-underfloor heating9010512013090105120130
Table
Table 3. Collected data information.
Table 3. Collected data information.
CategoriesName of CourthouseYear of CompletionGFA (m2)G-SEED
G-SEED certified and after revision Central areaSuwon family court 202018,164certified
Suwon district court 201989,441certified
Southern areaJeonju district court201938,934certified
G-SEED certified and before revisionCentral areaCheonan branch court201724,130certified
Seoul Eastern district court201745,181certified
Southern areaBusan district court201726,430certified
G-SEED non-certified and before revisionCentral areaSeoul family court201241,669non-certified
Incheon district court200236,801non-certified
Southern areaUlsan district court201435,174non-certified
Table
Table 4. Collected energy consumption data (G-SEED certified and after insulation thickness standard revision).
Table 4. Collected energy consumption data (G-SEED certified and after insulation thickness standard revision).
CategorySuwon Family CourtSuwon District CourtJeonju District Court
HeatingGasElectricityHeatingElectricityGasElectricity
January 20211334945110,574422394,598505,045273,480
February 202172755177,616262317,171328,205209,622
March 202133917662,478130328,259206,953162,577
April 2021710,26549,89631268,115128,567143,367
May 2021510,59770,75837285,875120,773134,003
June 20215178,71495,616358398,963360,351183,180
July 20214374,374101,070820517,859572,782241,353
August 20214423,987101,376701492,467524,828251,419
September 20213200,22563,702255344,003349,794221,255
October 2021444,82863,97260293,123181,632158,189
November 202128981977,868117321,299134,235151,768
December 20218213,16290,468358399,539427,123212,678
Table
Table 5. Collected energy consumption data (G-SEED certified and before insulation thickness standard revision).
Table 5. Collected energy consumption data (G-SEED certified and before insulation thickness standard revision).
CategoryCheonan Branch CourtSeoul Eastern District CourtBusan District Court
HeatingElectricityHeatingElectricityHeatingElectricity
January 2021182107,920200280,590121105,567
February 202112583,800168287,1068186,896
March 20216573,68495214,0265691,552
April 20211759,24831189,5101484,240
May 20211356,98541178,4724086,812
June 20216790,892226218,205162110,467
July 2021144120,412371246,357248142,254
August 2021128116,861295302,841249145,147
September 20217091,563177270,945146108,070
October 20212664,85137198,5495291,858
November 20216279,35988207,2251388,055
December 2021157125,925175238,20680112,547
Table
Table 6. Collected energy consumption data (G-SEED non-certified and before insulation thickness standard revision).
Table 6. Collected energy consumption data (G-SEED non-certified and before insulation thickness standard revision).
CategorySeoul Family CourtIncheon District CourtUlsan District Court
GasElectricityGasElectricityGasElectricity
January 20211,453,245243,9031,837,082281,496709,005162,984
February 20212,457,053240,8741,338,151212,832977,778182,208
March 20211,544,465269,496889,360246,600711,792147,192
April 2021734,748153,577346,764210,432370,961159,888
May 2021244,616137,453151,613275,232218,876141,192
June 2021168,271178,503534,161314,736191,968142,104
July 2021520,734208,6551,820,255336,648466,488188,688
August 2021960,034248,6151,914,146333,000665,509223,824
September 20211,129,775233,733932,983265,440716,233215,448
October 2021531,662166,447316,390188,520476,719180,752
November 2021205,939155,009353,367217,392264,157156,096
December 2021436,365192,675887,443262,296302,821150,840
Table
Table 7. Total energy consumption of Korean courthouse buildings (G-SEED certified and after insulation thickness standard revision).
Table 7. Total energy consumption of Korean courthouse buildings (G-SEED certified and after insulation thickness standard revision).
CategoryTotal Energy Consumption (kWh/m2)
Suwon Family CourtSuwon District CourtJeonju District Court
January 202114.769.9010.62
February 20219.046.967.72
March 20215.725.365.66
April 20213.373.414.60
May 20214.393.694.30
June 20218.369.117.27
July 202111.616.4610.29
August 202112.3814.6310.20
September 20216.797.178.18
October 20214.494.065.36
November 20216.265.124.86
December 202110.479.128.51
Table
Table 8. Total energy consumption of Korean courthouse buildings (G-SEED certified and before insulation thickness standard revision).
Table 8. Total energy consumption of Korean courthouse buildings (G-SEED certified and before insulation thickness standard revision).
CategoryTotal Energy Consumption (kWh/m2)
Cheonan Branch CourtSeoul Eastern District CourtBusan District Court
January 202113.2611.359.31
February 20219.4910.676.85
March 20216.167.185.92
April 20213.304.983.81
May 20213.005.005.04
June 20217.0110.6411.31
July 202111.9315.0116.29
August 202111.0014.2916.45
September 20217.1510.5410.51
October 20213.965.345.77
November 20216.266.873.90
December 202112.799.777.78
Table
Table 9. Total energy consumption of Korean courthouse buildings (G-SEED non-certified and before insulation thickness standard revision).
Table 9. Total energy consumption of Korean courthouse buildings (G-SEED non-certified and before insulation thickness standard revision).
CategoryTotal Energy Consumption (kWh/m2)
Seoul Family CourtIncheon District CourtUlsan District Court
January 202118.4321.5210.24
February 202126.2715.8812.91
March 202119.8813.419.82
April 202110.188.347.48
May 20215.848.625.75
June 20216.4112.585.56
July 202110.0622.899.06
August 202114.6623.5011.63
September 202115.5814.2511.79
October 20218.947.518.91
November 20216.048.586.53
December 20218.9313.836.68
Table
Table 10. Effectiveness of the revision of the building insulation thickness standard and G-SEED certification on energy consumption of courthouse buildings.
Table 10. Effectiveness of the revision of the building insulation thickness standard and G-SEED certification on energy consumption of courthouse buildings.
CategoryBuilding Insulation ThicknessG-SEED
CentralSouthernOverallCentralSouthernOverall
January 202123.61%−8.64%29.71%38.34%2.69%31.06%
February 202148.64%21.86%56.92%57.11%43.57%53.93%
March 202152.48%28.08%61.17%63.32%41.04%58.25%
April 202149.40%18.51%56.23%59.34%43.78%54.87%
May 202128.05%20.30%38.74%44.40%18.78%37.11%
June 20214.64%13.81%−0.77%7.53%−67.09%−9.37%
July 20216.29%18.82%8.71%16.54%−46.69%2.90%
August 202114.86%27.35%25.27%31.47%−14.57%20.72%
September 202141.25%26.64%46.80%46.95%20.74%39.52%
October 202133.59%26.98%45.15%45.74%37.54%42.86%
November 202117.98%6.81%23.22%16.18%32.92%21.35%
December 202113.55%−17.70%4.55%7.40%−21.93%0.75%
Total27.19%16.32%34.61%37.98%10.44%31.14%
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Nindartin, A.; Moon, H.-W.; Park, S.-J.; Lee, K.-T.; Im, J.-B.; Kim, J.-H. Influencing of the Building Energy Policies upon the Efficiency of Energy Consumption: The Case of Courthouse Buildings in South Korea. Energies 2022, 15, 6679. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15186679

AMA Style

Nindartin A, Moon H-W, Park S-J, Lee K-T, Im J-B, Kim J-H. Influencing of the Building Energy Policies upon the Efficiency of Energy Consumption: The Case of Courthouse Buildings in South Korea. Energies. 2022; 15(18):6679. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15186679

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nindartin, Acinia, Hee-Woon Moon, Sang-Jun Park, Kyung-Tae Lee, Jin-Bin Im, and Ju-Hyung Kim. 2022. "Influencing of the Building Energy Policies upon the Efficiency of Energy Consumption: The Case of Courthouse Buildings in South Korea" Energies 15, no. 18: 6679. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15186679

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop