Assessment of Energy Efficiency and Conservation at the UNTAG Surabaya Rectorate Building Using EDGE and GREENSHIP
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58524/ijhes.v5i3.1410Abstract
The building subsector is the largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in Indonesia’s energy sector, with approximately 90% of its emissions stemming from electricity consumption. The implementation of green building concepts is one of the efforts to improve energy efficiency and reduce these emissions. This study aims to evaluate the energy efficiency and conservation (EEC) score in the GREENSHIP rating system and compare it with energy savings estimates using the excellence in design for greater efficiencies (EDGE) Building App at the Rectorate Building of the University of 17 August 1945 in Surabaya. The study employed a quantitative descriptive method based on electricity consumption data and observations of electricity usage for the GREENSHIP evaluation, as well as calculations of the Window-to-Wall Ratio (WWR) and building characteristics for energy performance simulations using the EDGE Building App. The results show that the GREENSHIP EEC score reached only 7 out of a total of 36 points, while the EDGE simulation indicated a potential energy savings of 26.37%. These results indicate that EDGE focuses on the percentage of energy savings compared to a baseline building, whereas GREENSHIP evaluates the implementation of energy management, efficiency, and conservation strategies more comprehensively. Therefore, a high level of energy savings does not necessarily result in a high GREENSHIP score without the comprehensive application of energy efficiency criteria.
References
Alsulaili, A. D., Al-Matrouk, M. F., Al-Baghli, R. A., & Al-Enezi, A. F. (2020). Environmental and economic benefits of applying green building concepts in Kuwait. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 22(4), 3371–3387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-019-00352-1
Anisah, Inayati, I., Soelami, F. X. N., & Triyogo, R. (2017). Identification of existing office buildings potential to become green buildings in energy efficiency aspect. Procedia Engineering, 170, 320–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.03.040
Bilgili, M., Tumse, S., & Nar, S. (2024). Comprehensive Overview on the Present State and Evolution of Global Warming , Climate Change , Greenhouse Gasses and Renewable Energy. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 49(11), 14503–14531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-024-09390-y
Brady, L., & Abdellatif, M. (2017). Assessment of energy consumption in existing buildings. Energy and Buildings, 149, 142–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.05.051
Farizal, F., Noviandri, M. A., & Hamdani, H. (2024). Sustainability Development through a Nearly Zero Energy Building Implementation Case : An Office Building in South Jakarta.
Green Building Council Indonesia. (2016). GREENSHIP Existing Building Version 1.1: Summary of Criteria and Benchmarks. Green Building Council Indonesia.
Harysakti, A., Permana, I., Segah, H., Sutrisno, H., & Sanitha, O. D. (2025). Evaluation of Existing Green Buildings on UPR Campus Using EDGE Application and Climate Consultant Software. 13, 2587–2600. https://doi.org/10.13189/cea.2025.131329
He, Y., Kvan, T., Liu, M., & Li, B. (2018). How green building rating systems affect designing green. Building and Environment, 133, 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.02.007
INDC. (2022). Enhanced Nationally Determined Contribution.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2023). Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC. https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647
International Finance Corporation, O. (2026). - Energy Measures.
Labaran, Y. H., Mathur, V. S., & Farouq, M. M. (2021). The carbon footprint of construction industry : A review of direct and indirect emission. 6(September), 101–115. https://doi.org/10.29187/jscmt.2021.66
Lendra, L., Jesica, J., Wibowo, M. A., Utomo, J., & Hatmoko, D. (2025). Green building assessment tools in Indonesia : a systematic literature review and comparative analysis. 03023, 1–10.
Lintas, K., Bidang, I., Arsitektur, R., Penggunaan, M., & Ramah, M. (2025). Jurnal KaLIBRASI Upaya Peningkatan Efisiensi Energi Bangunan Berkonsep Berkelanjutan. 8(2), 113–124.
Rahmasari, K., Dewi, O. C., Salsabila, N. D., & Danusastro, Y. (2024). Green Building Certification in Educational Facility Green Building Certification in Educational Facility. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1395/1/012024
Ramadhan, G. A., Anshori, M., Sulistiawan, A., Mesin, T., Nahdlatul, U., & Sunan, U. (2025). Evaluasi Efisiensi Energi Pada Sistem Green Building : 11(02), 10268–10274.
Troup, L., Phillips, R., Eckelman, M. J., & Fannon, D. (2019). Effect of window-to-wall ratio on measured energy consumption in US office buildings. Energy and Buildings, 203, 109434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.109434
Zhang, C., Cui, C., Zhang, Y., Yuan, J., Luo, Y., & Gang, W. (2019). A review of renewable energy assessment methods in green building and green neighborhood rating systems. Energy and Buildings, 195, 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.04.040
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Kresna Gemilang, Endah Safitri, Sholihin As'ad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
