Journal of Korean Institute of Architectural Sustainable Environment and Building Systems (한국건축친환경설비학회 논문집)

Korean Institute of Architectural Sustainable Environment and Building Systems (한국건축친환경설비학회)
권호 표지

Comparison of Domestic and Abroad Supporting Policies and Characteristic of Energy Performance Analysis Tools for Existing Buildings

국내·외 기존 건축물 지원정책 및 에너지성능평가도구의 특징 비교

  • Kim, Yeon-Ah (Institute of Green Building and New Technology, Mirae Environment Plan) ;
  • Jang, Hyang-In (Institute of Green Building and New Technology, Mirae Environment Plan) ;
  • Park, Chang-Young (Institute of Green Building and New Technology, Mirae Environment Plan) ;
  • Lee, Keon Ho (Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology) ;
  • Koo, Bo Kyoung (Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology)
  • 김연아 (미래환경플랜(주) 건축친환경신기술연구소) ;
  • 장향인 (미래환경플랜(주) 건축친환경신기술연구소) ;
  • 박창영 (미래환경플랜(주) 건축친환경신기술연구소) ;
  • 이건호 (한국건설기술연구원) ;
  • 구보경 (한국건설기술연구원)
  • Received : 2015.02.11
  • Accepted : 2015.04.16
  • Published : 2015.04.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The market size for green remodeling continues to increase as domestic and abroad policies and supporting systems for green remodeling of existing buildings are actively underway. For a successful green remodeling project, the energy characteristics of the existing building must be identified with energy performance analysis tools. Therefore, this study investigated the trends in national policies and supporting policies for green remodeling and compared the scope and characteristics of energy performance analysis tools for the analysis of green remodeling technologies. In order to conduct an energy analysis on existing buildings, the ISO13790-based quasi-steady analysis tool was developed considering policies and the situations of each country, and dynamic analysis tools such as EnergyPlus, TRNSYS, IDA-ICE and ESP-r were used for the investigation. The quasi-steady analysis tool has simple configurations for input items and levels of analysis factors; therefore, it is relatively easy to use and takes a shorter time for analysis. On the other hand, dynamic analysis tools are configured with multiple complex input items; thus, they require more specialized knowledge. However, they provide detailed simulations on actual buildings. Therefore, we suggest that a quasi-steady analysis tool is effective for evaluating legal standards in a short period of time, and the use of dynamic analysis tools is required for detailed energy analysis in accordance with building characteristics and key technologies.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 국토교통부

References

  1. 곽노열. (2013). 기존 사무소건물의 BEMS 적용 타당성 평가 및 프로세스 제안. 대한건축학회논문집(계획계). 29(11), 299-306. https://doi.org/10.5659/JAIK_PD.2013.29.11.299
  2. 박률 (2010). 상업용 건축물의 공조시스템 리모델링 의사결정을 위한 평가기준 가중치 부여법(CWM)의 중요도 및 평가척도 산출. 대한건축학회지회연합회논문집. 12(3), 221-228.
  3. 김승남. (2014). 녹색건축 활성화 정책의 현황과 과제.
  4. 보도자료. (2014.2). 기후환경본부 환경정책과.
  5. Wang S., Yan, C., Xiao, F. (2012). Quantitative energy performance assessment methods for existing buildings. Eenrgy and Buildings, 55, 873-888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.08.037
  6. Ferreira, J., Pinheiro, M.D., de Brito, J. (2013). Refurbishment decision support tools: A review from a Portuguese user's perspective. Construction and Buildings Materials. 49, 425-447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.08.064
  7. Pan, Y., Xu, Z., Li, Y., Levine, M., Feng, W., Zhou, N. (2012). Evaluation commercial building retrofit energy saving by using a building retrofit tool-case studies in shanghai. ASim 2012.
  8. Erhorn, H., de Boer, J., Wossner, S., Hottges, K. Erhorn-Kluttig, H. (2007). DIN V 18599: The German holistic energy performance calculation method for the implementation of the EPBD, 2nd PALENC and 28th AIVC 2007.
  9. Mark Shaurette, (2010). Simulation tools to support energy efficient retrofit of small commercial buildings. icccbe2010.
  10. IEA ECBCS Annex 50. (2011). Retrofit Simulation Report.
  11. IEA EBC Annex 53. (2013). Total energy use in buildings_ Analysis and evaluation methods.
  12. NSB. (2014). Retrofitting of Buildings.
  13. Green Building Platinum series. (2010). Existing building retrofit.
  14. Passive House Institute. (2012). EnerPHit and EnerPHit+i.
  15. (사)에너지절약전문기업협회: http://www.esco.or.kr
  16. 창조센터 : http://www.greenremodeling.or.kr
  17. Eco-Loan: FRA31 Zero-rated eco-loan, (2014)
  18. IEA ECBCS Annex36: http://www.annex36.com
  19. IDA-ICE: http://www.equa.se/index.php/en/ida-ice
  20. IDEAL EPBD: http://www.ideal-epbd.eu/
  21. Green Deal UK: http://www.greendealuk.co.uk
  22. KfW-Energy : https://www.kfw.de/inlandsfoerderung/ Unternehmen/Energie-Umwelt
  23. PACE Now: http://pacenow.org
  24. RdSAP2012: http://www.bre.co.uk/sap2012
  25. SBEM: http://www.ncm.bre.co.uk
  26. Whole Building Analysis-Retrofit Anaysis: http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/tools_directory/subjects.cfm/pagename=subjects/pagename_menu=whole_building_analysis/pagename_submenu=retrofit_analysis