Loading [MathJax]/jax/element/mml/optable/GeneralPunctuation.js
Research article Special Issues

European market structure for integrated home renovation support service: Scope and comparison of the different kind of one stop shops

  • Received: 14 April 2023 Revised: 11 August 2023 Accepted: 21 August 2023 Published: 19 September 2023
  • While the retrofitting of the building stock seems to be an effective solution to reach the targets for 2049 greenhouse gas emission, the current rate and quality of work is still too low. This article first proposes a state-of-the-art methodology and a brief description of the barriers to renovation. The literature review identifies 26 major issues. Then, the one stop shops (OSS), which are introduced as a solution to these barriers, are described under different aspects according to their business model, the type of project owner targeted and the kind of services they offer with their support. Drawing on previous literature, this article proposes a classification framework. Then a comprehensive benchmark of 63 OSSs in Europe was conducted, allowing for a comparative analysis of the distribution of OSSs models across various countries and territories; it highlights the existing need in all countries, but also the disparity of support being provided. This examination revealed that selecting an appropriate OSS model cannot be solely based on factors like scope, ownership, or the existence of other OSSs. In the final section, a correlation study is made between several criteria (energy consumption and type, urbanization rate, construction date, climatic context, renovation rate etc.) that have been identified as being potentially indicative of renovation activities. The objective of this work is to provide an overview of the current context and emphasize effective strategies to accelerate the pace of renovation. By identifying and addressing the unique needs and challenges in each specific context, the goal is to promote efficient and streamlined renovation processes.

    Citation: Estay Lucas, Peperstraete Marthe, Ginestet Stephane, Oms-Multon Claire, Bonhomme Marion. European market structure for integrated home renovation support service: Scope and comparison of the different kind of one stop shops[J]. AIMS Energy, 2023, 11(5): 846-877. doi: 10.3934/energy.2023041

    Related Papers:

    [1] Shishi Wang, Yuting Ding, Hongfan Lu, Silin Gong . Stability and bifurcation analysis of SIQR for the COVID-19 epidemic model with time delay. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(5): 5505-5524. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021278
    [2] Hongfan Lu, Yuting Ding, Silin Gong, Shishi Wang . Mathematical modeling and dynamic analysis of SIQR model with delay for pandemic COVID-19. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(4): 3197-3214. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021159
    [3] Sarita Bugalia, Jai Prakash Tripathi, Hao Wang . Mathematical modeling of intervention and low medical resource availability with delays: Applications to COVID-19 outbreaks in Spain and Italy. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(5): 5865-5920. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021295
    [4] Honghua Bin, Daifeng Duan, Junjie Wei . Bifurcation analysis of a reaction-diffusion-advection predator-prey system with delay. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(7): 12194-12210. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023543
    [5] Yuting Ding, Gaoyang Liu, Yong An . Stability and bifurcation analysis of a tumor-immune system with two delays and diffusion. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(2): 1154-1173. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022053
    [6] Fang Liu, Yanfei Du . Spatiotemporal dynamics of a diffusive predator-prey model with delay and Allee effect in predator. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(11): 19372-19400. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023857
    [7] Xin-You Meng, Yu-Qian Wu . Bifurcation analysis in a singular Beddington-DeAngelis predator-prey model with two delays and nonlinear predator harvesting. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(4): 2668-2696. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019133
    [8] Jinhu Xu, Yicang Zhou . Bifurcation analysis of HIV-1 infection model with cell-to-cell transmission and immune response delay. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2016, 13(2): 343-367. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015006
    [9] Xinyu Liu, Zimeng Lv, Yuting Ding . Mathematical modeling and stability analysis of the time-delayed SAIM model for COVID-19 vaccination and media coverage. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(6): 6296-6316. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022294
    [10] Zuolin Shen, Junjie Wei . Hopf bifurcation analysis in a diffusive predator-prey system with delay and surplus killing effect. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2018, 15(3): 693-715. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2018031
  • While the retrofitting of the building stock seems to be an effective solution to reach the targets for 2049 greenhouse gas emission, the current rate and quality of work is still too low. This article first proposes a state-of-the-art methodology and a brief description of the barriers to renovation. The literature review identifies 26 major issues. Then, the one stop shops (OSS), which are introduced as a solution to these barriers, are described under different aspects according to their business model, the type of project owner targeted and the kind of services they offer with their support. Drawing on previous literature, this article proposes a classification framework. Then a comprehensive benchmark of 63 OSSs in Europe was conducted, allowing for a comparative analysis of the distribution of OSSs models across various countries and territories; it highlights the existing need in all countries, but also the disparity of support being provided. This examination revealed that selecting an appropriate OSS model cannot be solely based on factors like scope, ownership, or the existence of other OSSs. In the final section, a correlation study is made between several criteria (energy consumption and type, urbanization rate, construction date, climatic context, renovation rate etc.) that have been identified as being potentially indicative of renovation activities. The objective of this work is to provide an overview of the current context and emphasize effective strategies to accelerate the pace of renovation. By identifying and addressing the unique needs and challenges in each specific context, the goal is to promote efficient and streamlined renovation processes.



    Consider with the following fourth-order elliptic Navier boundary problem

    {Δ2u+cΔu=λa(x)|u|s2u+f(x,u)inΩ,u=Δu=0onΩ, (1.1)

    where Δ2:=Δ(Δ) denotes the biharmonic operator, ΩRN(N4) is a smooth bounded domain, c<λ1 (λ1 is the first eigenvalue of Δ in H10(Ω)) is a constant, 1<s<2,λ0 is a parameter, aL(Ω),a(x)0,a(x)0, and fC(ˉΩ×R,R). It is well known that some of these fourth order elliptic problems appear in different areas of applied mathematics and physics. In the pioneer paper Lazer and Mckenna [13], they modeled nonlinear oscillations for suspensions bridges. It is worth mentioning that problem (1.1) can describe static deflection of an elastic plate in a fluid, see [21,22]. The static form change of beam or the motion of rigid body can be described by the same problem. Equations of this type have received more and more attentions in recent years. For the case λ=0, we refer the reader to [3,7,11,14,16,17,20,23,27,29,34,35,36,37] and the reference therein. In these papers, existence and multiplicity of solutions have been concerned under some assumptions on the nonlinearity f. Most of them considered the case f(x,u)=b[(u+1)+1] or f having asymptotically linear growth at infinity or f satisfying the famous Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz condition at infinity. Particularly, in the case λ0, that is, the combined nonlinearities for the fourth-order elliptic equations, Wei [33] obtained some existence and multiplicity by using the variational method. However, the author only considered the case that the nonlinearity f is asymptotically linear. When λ=1, Pu et al. [26] did some similar work. There are some latest works for problem (1.1), for example [10,18] and the reference therein. In this paper, we study problem (1.1) from two aspects. One is that we will obtain two multiplicity results when the nonlinearity f is superlinear at infinity and has the standard subcritical polynomial growth but not satisfy the Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz condition, the other is we can establish some existence results of multiple solutions when the nonlinearity f has the exponential growth but still not satisfy the Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz condition. In the first case, the standard methods for the verification of the compactness condition will fail, we will overcome it by using the functional analysis methods, i.e., Hahn-Banach Theorem combined the Resonance Theorem. In the last case, although the original version of the mountain pass theorem of Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz [1] is not directly applied for our purpose. Therefore, we will use a suitable version of mountain pass theorem and some new techniques to finish our goal.

    When N>4, there have been substantial lots of works (such as [3,7,11,16,17,26,34,35,36,37]) to study the existence of nontrivial solutions or the existence of sign-changing for problem (1.1). Furthermore, almost all of the works involve the nonlinear term f(x,u) of a standard subcritical polynomial growth, say:

    (SCP): There exist positive constants c1 and q(1,p1) such that

    |f(x,t)|c1(1+|t|q)for alltRandxΩ,

    where p=2NN4 expresses the critical Sobolev exponent. In this case, people can deal with problem (1.1) variationally in the Sobolev space H2(Ω)H10(Ω) owing to the some critical point theory, such as, the method of invariant sets of descent flow, mountain pass theorem and symmetric mountain pass theorem. It is worth while to note that since Ambrosetti and Rabinowitz presented the mountain pass theorem in their pioneer paper [1], critical point theory has become one of the main tools on looking for solutions to elliptic equation with variational structure. One of the important condition used in many works is the so-called Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz condition:

    (AR) There exist θ>2 and R>0 such that

    0<θF(x,t)f(x,t)t,forxΩand|t|R,

    where F(x,t)=t0f(x,s)ds. A simple computation explains that there exist c2,c3>0 such that F(x,t)c2|t|θc3 for all (x,t)ˉΩ×R and f is superlinear at infinity, i.e., limtf(x,t)t=+ uniformly in xΩ. Thus problem (1.1) is called strict superquadratic if the nonlinearity f satisfies the (AR) condition. Notice that (AR) condition plays an important role in ensuring the boundedness of Palais-Smale sequences. However, there are many nonlinearities which are superlinear at infinity but do not satisfy above (AR) condition such as f(x,t)=tln(1+|t|2)+|sint|t.

    In the recent years many authors tried to study problem (1.1) with λ=0 and the standard Laplacian problem where (AR) is not assumed. Instead, they regard the general superquadratic condition:

    (WSQC) The following limit holds

    lim|t|+F(x,t)t2=+,uniformly forxΩ

    with additional assumptions (see [3,5,7,11,12,15,17,19,24,26,31,37] and the references therein). In the most of them, there are some kind of monotonicity restrictions on the functions F(x,t) or f(x,t)t, or some convex property for the function tf(x,t)2F(x,t).

    In the case N=4 and c=0, motivated by the Adams inequality, there are a few works devoted to study the existence of nontrivial solutions for problem (1.1) when the nonlinearity f has the exponential growth, for example [15] and the references therein.

    Now, we begin to state our main results: Let μ1 be the first eigenvalue of (Δ2cΔ,H2(Ω)H10(Ω)) and suppose that f(x,t) satisfies:

    (H1) f(x,t)t0,(x,t)Ω×R;

    (H2) limt0f(x,t)t=f0 uniformly for a.e. xΩ, where f0[0,+);

    (H3) limtF(x,t)t2=+ uniformly for a.e. xΩ, where F(x,t)=t0f(x,s)ds.

    In the case of N>4, our results are stated as follows:

    Theorem 1.1. Assume that f has the standard subcritical polynomial growth on Ω (condition (SCP)) and satisfies (H1)(H3). If f0<μ1 and a(x)a0 (a0 is a positive constant ), then there exists Λ>0 such that for λ(0,Λ), problem (1.1) has five solutions, two positive solutions, two negative solutions and one nontrivial solution.

    Theorem 1.2. Assume that f has the standard subcritical polynomial growth on Ω (condition (SCP)) and satisfies (H2) and (H3). If f(x,t) is odd in t.

    a) For every λR, problem (1.1) has a sequence of solutions {uk} such that Iλ(uk),k, definition of the functional Iλ will be seen in Section 2.

    b) If f0<μ1, for every λ>0, problem (1.1) has a sequence of solutions {uk} such that Iλ(uk)<0 and Iλ(uk)0,k.

    Remark. Since our the nonlinear term f(x,u) satisfies more weak condition (H3) compared with the classical condition (AR), our Theorem 1.2 completely contains Theorem 3.20 in [32].

    In case of N=4, we have p=+. So it's necessary to introduce the definition of the subcritical exponential growth and critical exponential growth in this case. By the improved Adams inequality (see [28] and Lemma 2.2 in Section 2) for the fourth-order derivative, namely,

    supuH2(Ω)H10(Ω),

    So, we now define the subcritical exponential growth and critical exponential growth in this case as follows:

    (SCE): f satisfies subcritical exponential growth on \Omega , i.e., \lim\limits_{t\rightarrow \infty}\frac{|f(x, t)|}{\exp(\alpha t^2)} = 0 uniformly on x\in \Omega for all \alpha > 0 .

    (CG): f satisfies critical exponential growth on \Omega , i.e., there exists \alpha_0 > 0 such that

    \lim\limits_{t\rightarrow \infty}\frac{|f(x, t)|}{\exp\left(\alpha t^2\right)} = 0, \; \text{uniformly on} \; x\in \Omega, \; \forall \alpha > \alpha_0,

    and

    \lim\limits_{t\rightarrow \infty}\frac{|f(x, t)|}{\exp\left(\alpha t^2\right)} = +\infty, \; \text{uniformly on} \; x\in \Omega, \; \forall \alpha < \alpha_0.

    When N = 4 and f satisfies the subcritical exponential growth (SCE), our work is still to consider problem (1.1) where the nonlinearity f satisfies the (WSQC)-condition at infinity. As far as we know, this case is rarely studied by other people for problem (1.1) except for [24]. Hence, our results are new and our methods are technique since we successfully proved the compactness condition by using the Resonance Theorem combined Adams inequality and the truncated technique. In fact, the new idea derives from our work [25]. Our results are as follows:

    Theorem 1.3. Assume that f satisfies the subcritical exponential growth on \Omega (condition \mathrm{(SCE)} ) and satisfies (H_1) (H_3) . If f_0 < \mu_1 and a(x)\geq a_0 (a_0 is a positive constant ) , then there exists \Lambda^* > 0 such that for \lambda\in (0, \Lambda^*), problem (1.1) has five solutions, two positive solutions, two negative solutions and one nontrivial solution.

    Remark. Let F(x, t) = t^2e^{\sqrt{|t|}}, \forall (x, t) \in \Omega\times \mathbb{R}. Then it satisfies that our conditions (H_1) (H_3) but not satisfy the condition \mathrm{(AR)} . It's worth noting that we do not impose any monotonicity condition on \frac{f(x, t)}{t} or some convex property on tf(x, t)-2F(x, t) . Hence, our Theorem 1.3 completely extends some results contained in [15,24] when \lambda = 0 in problem (1.1).

    Theorem 1.4. Assume that f satisfies the subcritical exponential growth on \Omega (condition \mathrm{(SCE)} ) and satisfies (H_2) and (H_3) . If f_0 < \mu_1 and f(x, t) is odd in t .

    a) For \lambda > 0 small enough, problem (1.1) has a sequence of solutions \{u_k\} such that I_\lambda(u_k)\rightarrow \infty, k\rightarrow \infty.

    b) For every \lambda > 0 , problem (1.1) has a sequence of solutions \{u_k\} such that I_\lambda(u_k) < 0 and I_\lambda(u_k)\rightarrow 0, k\rightarrow \infty.

    When N = 4 and f satisfies the critical exponential growth \mathrm{(CG)} , the study of problem (1.1) becomes more complicated than in the case of subcritical exponential growth. Similar to the case of the critical polynomial growth in \mathbb{R}^N\; (N\geq 3) for the standard Laplacian studied by Brezis and Nirenberg in their pioneering work [4], our Euler-Lagrange functional does not satisfy the Palais-Smale condition at all level anymore. For the class standard Laplacian problem, the authors [8] used the extremal function sequences related to Moser-Trudinger inequality to complete the verification of compactness of Euler-Lagrange functional at some suitable level. Here, we still adapt the method of choosing the testing functions to study problem (1.1) without (AR) condition. Our result is as follows:

    Theorem 1.5. Assume that f has the critical exponential growth on \Omega (condition \mathrm{(CG)} ) and satisfies (H_1) (H_3) . Furthermore, assume that

    (H_4) \lim\limits_{t\rightarrow \infty}f(x, t) \exp(-\alpha_0t^2)t\geq \beta > \frac{64}{\alpha_0r_0^4} , uniformly in (x, t), where r_0 is the inner radius of \Omega , i.e., r_0: = radius of the largest open ball \subset \Omega. and

    (H_5) f is in the class (H_0) , i.e., for any \{u_n\} in H^2(\Omega)\cap H_0^1(\Omega) , if u_n\rightharpoonup 0 in H^2(\Omega)\cap H_0^1(\Omega) and f(x, u_n)\rightarrow 0 in L^1(\Omega), then F(x, u_n)\rightarrow 0 in L^1(\Omega) (up to a subsequence).

    If f_0 < \mu_1, then there exists \Lambda^* > 0 such that for \lambda\in (0, \Lambda^*), problem (1.1) has at least four nontrivial solutions.

    Remark. For standard biharmonic problems with Dirichlet boundary condition, Lam and Lu [15] have recently established the existence of nontrivial nonnegative solutions when the nonlinearity f has the critical exponential growth of order \exp(\alpha u^2) but without satisfying the Ambrosetti- Rabinowitz condition. However, for problem (1.1) with Navier boundary condition involving critical exponential growth and the concave term, there are few works to study it. Hence our result is new and interesting.

    The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present some necessary preliminary knowledge and some important lemmas. In Section 3, we give the proofs for our main results. In Section 4, we give a conclusion.

    We let \lambda_k (k = 1, 2, \cdot\cdot\cdot) denote the eigenvalue of -\Delta in H_0^1(\Omega) , then 0 < \mu_1 < \mu_2 < \cdot\cdot\cdot < \mu_k < \cdot\cdot\cdot be the eigenvalues of (\Delta^2-c\Delta, H^2(\Omega)\cap H_0^1(\Omega)) and \varphi_k(x) be the eigenfunction corresponding to \mu_k . Let X_k denote the eigenspace associated to \mu_k. In fact, \mu_k = \lambda_k(\lambda_k-c). Throughout this paper, we denote by \|\cdot\|_p the L^p(\Omega) norm, c < \lambda_1 in \Delta^2-c\Delta and the norm of u in H^2(\Omega)\cap H_0^1(\Omega) will be defined by the

    \|u\|: = \left(\int_\Omega (|\Delta u|^2-c|\nabla u|^2)dx\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}.

    We also denote E = H^2(\Omega)\cap H_0^1(\Omega) .

    Definition 2.1. Let ( \mathbb{E}, ||\cdot||_\mathbb{E}) be a real Banach space with its dual space (\mathbb{E}^*, ||\cdot||_{\mathbb{E}^*}) and I\in C^1(\mathbb{E}, \mathbb{R}) . For c^*\in \mathbb{ R}, we say that I satisfies the \mathrm{(PS)_{c^*}} condition if for any sequence \{x_n\}\subset \mathbb{E} with

    I(x_n)\rightarrow c^*, I'(x_n)\rightarrow 0 \ \mbox{in}\ \mathbb{E}^*,

    there is a subsequence \{x_{n_k}\} such that \{x_{n_k}\} converges strongly in \mathbb{E} . Also, we say that I satisfy the \mathrm{(C)_{c^*}} condition if for any sequence \{x_n\}\subset \mathbb{E} with

    I(x_n)\rightarrow c^*, \ ||I'(x_n)||_{\mathbb{E}^*}(1+||x_n||_\mathbb{E})\rightarrow 0,

    there exists subsequence \{ x_{n_k}\} such that \{ x_{n_k}\} converges strongly in \mathbb{E}.

    Definition 2.2. We say that u\in E is the solution of problem (1.1) if the identity

    \int_\Omega (\Delta u \Delta \varphi-c\nabla u \nabla \varphi)dx = \lambda\int_\Omega a(x)|u|^{s-2}u\varphi dx+\int_\Omega f(x, u)\varphi dx

    holds for any \varphi\in E.

    It is obvious that the solutions of problem (1.1) are corresponding with the critical points of the following C^1 functional:

    I_\lambda(u) = \frac{1}{2}\|u\|^2-\frac{\lambda}{s}\int_\Omega a(x)|u|^sdx-\int_\Omega F(x, u)dx, \quad u\in E.

    Let u^+ = \max\{u, 0\}, u^- = \min\{u, 0\}.

    Now, we concern the following problem

    \begin{equation} \left\{\begin{array}{ll} \Delta^2u+c\Delta u = \lambda a(x)|u^+|^{s-2}u^++f^+(x, u) \; &\text{in}\; \Omega, \\ u = \Delta u = 0 \; &\text{on}\; \partial \Omega, \end{array}\right. \end{equation} (2.1)

    where

    f^+(x, t) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll} f(x, t) \; &t\geq 0, \\ 0, \; &t < 0. \end{array}\right.

    Define the corresponding functional I_\lambda^+:E\rightarrow \mathbb{R} as follows:

    I_\lambda^+(u) = \frac{1}{2}\|u\|^2-\frac{\lambda}{s}\int_\Omega a(x)|u^+|^sdx-\int_\Omega F^+(x, u)dx,

    where F^+(x, u) = \int_0^u f^+(x, s)ds. Obviously, the condition \mathrm{(SCP)} or \mathrm{(SCE)} ( \mathrm{(CG)} ) ensures that I_\lambda^+\in C^1(E, \mathbb{R}). Let u be a critical point of I_\lambda^+, which means that u is a weak solution of problem (2.1). Furthermore, since the weak maximum principle (see [34]), it implies that u\geq 0 in \Omega . Thus u is also a solution of problem (1.1) and I_\lambda^+(u) = I_\lambda(u) .

    Similarly, we define

    f^-(x, t) = \left\{\begin{array}{ll} f(x, t) \; &t\leq 0, \\ 0, \; &t > 0, \end{array}\right.

    and

    I_\lambda^-(u) = \frac{1}{2}\|u\|^2-\frac{\lambda}{s}\int_\Omega a(x)|u^-|^sdx-\int_\Omega F^-(x, u)dx,

    where F^-(x, u) = \int_0^u f^-(x, s)ds. Similarly, we also have I_\lambda^-\in C^1(E, \mathbb{R}) and if v is a critical point of I_\lambda^- then it is a solution of problem (1.1) and I_\lambda^-(v) = I_\lambda(v) .

    Prosition 2.1. ([6,30]). Let \mathbb{E} be a real Banach space and suppose that I \in C^1(\mathbb{E}, \mathbb{R}) satisfies the condition

    \max\{I(0), I(u_1)\}\leq\alpha < \beta\leq\inf\limits_{||u|| = \rho}I(u),

    for some \alpha < \beta, \rho > 0 and u_1\in \mathbb{E} with ||u_1|| > \rho. Let c^*\geq\beta be characterized by

    c^* = \inf\limits_{\gamma\in \Gamma}\max\limits_{0\leq t\leq1}I(\gamma(t)),

    where \Gamma = \{\gamma\in C([0, 1], \mathbb{E}), \gamma(0) = 0, \gamma(1) = u_1\} is the set of continuous paths joining 0 and u_1. Then, there exists a sequence \{u_n\}\subset \mathbb{E} such that

    I(u_n)\rightarrow c^*\geq\beta\ \mathit{\mbox{and}}\ (1+||u_n|| )||I'(u_n)||_{\mathbb{E}^*}\rightarrow0\ \mathit{\mbox{as}}\ n\rightarrow \infty.

    Lemma 2.1. ([28]). Let \Omega\subset \mathbb{R}^4 be a bounded domain. Then there exists a constant C > 0 such that

    \sup\limits_{u\in E, \|\Delta u\|_2\leq 1}\int_\Omega e^{32\pi^2u^2}dx < C|\Omega|,

    and this inequality is sharp.

    Next, we introduce the following a revision of Adams inequality:

    Lemma 2.2. Let \Omega\subset \mathbb{R}^4 be a bounded domain. Then there exists a constant C^* > 0 such that

    \sup\limits_{u\in E, \| u\|\leq 1}\int_\Omega e^{32\pi^2 u^2}dx < C^*|\Omega|,

    and this inequality is also sharp.

    Proof. We will give a summarize proof in two different cases. In the case of c\leq0 in the definition of \|.\| , if \|u\|\leq 1, we can deduce that \|\Delta u\|_2\leq 1 and by using Lemma 2.1 combined with the Proposition 6.1 in [28], the conclusion holds.

    In the case of 0 < c < \lambda_1 in the definition of \|.\| , from Lemma 2.1, the proof and remark of Theorem 1 in [2] and the proof of Proposition 6.1 in [28], we still can establish this revised Adams inequality.

    Lemma 2.3. Assume (H_{1}) and (H_{3}) hold. If f has the standard subcritical polynomial growth on \Omega (condition \mathrm{(SCP)} ), then I_\lambda^+ ( I_\lambda^- ) satisfies \mathrm{(C)}_{c^*} .

    Proof. We only prove the case of I_\lambda^+ . The arguments for the case of I_\lambda^- are similar. Let \{u_n\}\subset E be a \mathrm{(C)}_{c^*} sequence such that

    \begin{equation} I_\lambda^+(u_n) = \frac{1}{2}||u_n||^2-\frac{\lambda}{s}\int_\Omega a(x)|u_n^+|^sdx-\int_\Omega F^+(x, u_n)dx = c^*+\circ(1), \end{equation} (2.2)
    \begin{equation} (1+||u_n||)||I_\lambda^{+'}(u_n)||_{E^*}\rightarrow 0\ \mbox{as}\ n\rightarrow \infty. \end{equation} (2.3)

    Obviously, (2.3) implies that

    \begin{equation} \langle I_\lambda^{+'}(u_n), \varphi\rangle = \langle u_n, \varphi \rangle-\lambda\int_\Omega a(x)|u_n^+|^{s-2}u_n^+\varphi dx-\int_\Omega f^+(x, u_n(x))\varphi dx = \circ(1). \end{equation} (2.4)

    Step 1. We claim that \{u_n\} is bounded in E . In fact, assume that

    \|u_n\|\rightarrow \infty, \ \ \text{as}\ n\rightarrow \infty.

    Define

    v_n = \frac{u_n}{\|u_n\|}.

    Then, \|v_n\| = 1 , \forall n\in {\bf N} and then, it is possible to extract a subsequence (denoted also by \{v_n\} ) converges weakly to v in E , converges strongly in L^p(\Omega) (1\leq p < p^*) and converges v a.e. x\in\Omega .

    Dividing both sides of (2.2) by \|u_n\|^2 , we get

    \begin{equation} \int_{\Omega} \frac{F^+(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|^2}dx\rightarrow \frac{1}{2}. \end{equation} (2.5)

    Set

    \Omega_+ = \{x\in \Omega: v(x) > 0\}.

    By (H_3) , we imply that

    \begin{equation} \frac{F^+(x, u_n)}{u_n^2}v_n^2\rightarrow \infty, \; \; x\in \Omega_+. \end{equation} (2.6)

    If |\Omega_+| is positive, since Fatou's lemma, we get

    \lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty}\int_{\Omega} \frac{F^+(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|^2}dx\geq\lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty}\int_{\Omega_+} \frac{F^+(x, u_n)}{u_n^2}v_n^2dx = +\infty,

    which contradicts with (2.5). Thus, we have v\leq 0 . In fact, we have v = 0 . Indeed, again using (2.3), we get

    (1+\|u_n\|) |\langle I_\lambda^{+'}(u_n), v\rangle|\leq \circ(1)\|v\|.

    Thus, we have

    \begin{eqnarray*} \int_\Omega (\Delta u_n \Delta v-c\nabla u_n \nabla v)dx &\leq& \int_\Omega (\Delta u_n \Delta v-c\nabla u \nabla v)dx-\lambda\int_\Omega a(x)|u_n^+|^{s-2}u_n^+vdx\\ &-&\int_\Omega f^+(x, u_n)vdx\leq \frac{\circ(1)\|v\|}{1+\|u_n\|}, \end{eqnarray*}

    by noticing that since v\leq 0, f^+(x, u_n)v\leq 0 \ \text{a.e.} \ x\in\Omega, thus -\int_\Omega f^+(x, u_n)vdx\geq 0. So we get

    \int_\Omega (\Delta v_n \Delta v-c\nabla v_n \nabla v)dx\rightarrow 0.

    On the other hand, from v_n\rightharpoonup v in E , we have

    \int_\Omega (\Delta v_n \Delta v-c\nabla v_n \nabla v)dx\rightarrow \|v\|^2

    which implies v = 0 .

    Dividing both sides of (2.4) by \|u_n\| , for any \varphi \in E , then there exists a positive constant M(\varphi) such that

    \begin{equation} \left|\int_\Omega \frac{f^+(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|}\varphi dx\right|\leq M(\varphi), \; \forall n\in {\bf N}. \end{equation} (2.7)

    Set

    {\bf f}_n(\varphi) = \int_\Omega \frac{f^+(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|}\varphi dx, \; \varphi \in E.

    Thus, by (SCP), we know that \{{\bf f}_n\} is a family bounded linear functionals defined on E . Combing (2.7) with the famous Resonance Theorem, we get that \{|{\bf f}_n|\} is bounded, where |{\bf f}_n| denotes the norm of {\bf f}_n . It means that

    \begin{equation} |{\bf f}_n|\leq C_*. \end{equation} (2.8)

    Since E\subset L^{\frac{p^*}{p^*-q}}(\Omega) , using the Hahn-Banach Theorem, there exists a continuous functional \hat{{\bf f}}_n defined on L^{\frac{p^*}{p^*-q}}(\Omega) such that \hat{{\bf f}}_n is an extension of {\bf f}_n , and

    \begin{equation} \hat{{\bf f}}_n(\varphi) = {\bf f}_n(\varphi), \; \varphi\in E, \end{equation} (2.9)
    \begin{equation} \|\hat{{\bf f}}_n\|_{\frac{p^*}{q}} = |{\bf f}_n|, \end{equation} (2.10)

    where \|\hat{{\bf f}}_n\|_{\frac{p^*}{q}} denotes the norm of \hat{{\bf f}}_n(\varphi) in L^{\frac{p^*}{q}}(\Omega) which is defined on L^{\frac{p^*}{p^*-q}}(\Omega) .

    On the other hand, from the definition of the linear functional on L^{\frac{p^*}{p^*-q}}(\Omega), we know that there exists a function S_n(x)\in L^{\frac{p^*}{q}}(\Omega) such that

    \begin{equation} \hat{{\bf f}}_n(\varphi) = \int_\Omega S_n(x)\varphi (x)dx, \; \varphi \in L^{\frac{p^*}{p^*-q}}(\Omega). \end{equation} (2.11)

    So, from (2.9) and (2.11), we obtain

    \int_\Omega S_n(x)\varphi (x)dx = \int_\Omega \frac{f^+(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|}\varphi dx, \; \varphi \in E,

    which implies that

    \int_\Omega \left(S_n(x)-\frac{f^+(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|}\right)\varphi dx = 0, \; \varphi \in E.

    According to the basic lemma of variational, we can deduce that

    S_n(x) = \frac{f^+(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|}\; \; \text{a.e.}\; x\in \Omega.

    Thus, by (2.8) and (2.10), we have

    \begin{equation} \|\hat{{\bf f}}_n\|_{\frac{p^*}{q}} = \|S_n\|_{\frac{p^*}{q}} = |{\bf f}_n| < C_*. \end{equation} (2.12)

    Now, taking \varphi = v_n-v in (2.4), we get

    \begin{equation} \langle A(v_n), v_n-v \rangle-\lambda\int_\Omega a(x)|u_n^+|^{s-2}u_n^+v_ndx-\int_\Omega \frac{f^+(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|}v_ndx\rightarrow 0, \end{equation} (2.13)

    where A: E\rightarrow E^* defined by

    \langle A(u), \varphi\rangle = \int_\Omega \Delta u \Delta \varphi dx-c\int_\Omega \nabla u \nabla \varphi dx, \ u, \varphi \in E.

    By the H \mathrm{\ddot{o}} lder inequality and (2.12), we obtain

    \int_\Omega \frac{f^+(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|}v_ndx\rightarrow 0.

    Then from (2.13), we can conclude that

    v_n\rightarrow v\; \; \text{in} \; E.

    This leads to a contradiction since \|v_n\| = 1 and v = 0. Thus, \{u_n\} is bounded in E .

    Step 2. We show that \{u_n\} has a convergence subsequence. Without loss of generality, we can suppose that

    \begin{align*} &u_n\rightharpoonup u\ \mbox{ in }\ E, \\ &u_n \rightarrow u \ \mbox{in}\ L^\gamma(\Omega), \ \forall1\leq \gamma < p^*, \\ &u_n(x)\rightarrow u(x)\ \mbox{a.e.}\ x\in \Omega. \end{align*}

    Now, it follows from f satisfies the condition (SCP) that there exist two positive constants c_4, c_5 > 0 such that

    f^+(x, t)\leq c_4 +c_5|t|^{q}, \ \forall (x, t)\in \Omega\times \mathbb{R},

    then

    \begin{eqnarray*} &&\left|\int_\Omega f^+(x, u_n)(u_n-u)dx\right|\\ && \leq c_4 \int_\Omega |u_n-u|dx+ c_5\int_\Omega |u_n-u||u_n|^{q}dx \\&&\leq c_4\int_\Omega |u_n-u|dx+c_5\left( \int_\Omega \left(|u_n|^{q}\right)^{\frac{p^*}{q}}dx\right)^{\frac{q}{p^*}}\left(\int_\Omega |u_n-u|^{\frac{p^*}{p^*-q}}dx\right)^{\frac{p^*-q}{p^*}}. \end{eqnarray*}

    Similarly, since u_n\rightharpoonup u in E, \int_\Omega |u_n-u|dx\rightarrow 0 and \int_\Omega |u_n-u|^{\frac{p^*}{p^*-q}}dx\rightarrow 0.

    Thus, from (2.4) and the formula above, we obtain

    \langle A(u_n), u_n-u\rangle\rightarrow 0, \; \text{as}\; n\rightarrow \infty.

    So, we get \|u_n\|\rightarrow \|u\| . Thus we have u_n\rightarrow u in E which implies that I_\lambda^+ satisfies \mathrm{(C)}_{c^*} .

    Lemma 2.4. Let \varphi _{1} > 0 be a \mu_{1} -eigenfunction with \| \varphi_{1} \| = 1 and assume that (H_{1}) (H_{3}) and \mathrm{(SCP)} hold. If f_{0} < \mu _{1}, then:

    \mathrm{(i)}\ For \lambda > 0 small enough, there exist \rho, \alpha > 0 such that I_\lambda^{\pm}(u)\geq \alpha for all u\in E with \| u \| = \rho,

    \mathrm{(ii)}\ I_\lambda^{\pm}(t\varphi_1)\rightarrow -\infty as t\rightarrow +\infty .

    Proof. Since \mathrm{(SCP)} and (H_1) (H_3), for any \varepsilon > 0, there exist A = A(\varepsilon), M large enough and B = B(\varepsilon) such that for all (x, s)\in \Omega\times \mathbb{R},

    \begin{equation} F^{\pm}(x, s)\leq \frac{1}{2}(f_0+\epsilon)s^2+A|s|^q, \end{equation} (2.14)
    \begin{equation} F^{\pm}(x, s)\geq \frac{M}{2}s^2-B. \end{equation} (2.15)

    Choose \varepsilon > 0 such that (f_0+\varepsilon) < \mu_1. By (2.14), the Poincaré inequality and the Sobolev embedding, we obtain

    \begin{eqnarray*} I_\lambda^{\pm}(u)&\geq&\frac{1}{2}\|u\|^2 -\frac{\lambda \|a\|_\infty}{s}\int_\Omega |u|^s dx-\int_\Omega{F^{\pm}(x, u)}dx\\&\geq& \frac{1}{2}\|u\|^2-\frac{\lambda \|a\|_\infty}{s}\int_\Omega |u|^s dx-\frac{f_0+\varepsilon}{2}\|u\|_2^2-A\int_\Omega |u|^qdx\\ &\geq&\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\frac{f_0+\varepsilon}{\mu_1}\right)\|u\|^2-\lambda K\|u\|^s-C^{**}\|u\|^q \\ &\geq&\|u\|^2\left(\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\frac{f_0+\varepsilon}{\mu_1}\right)-\lambda K\|u\|^{s-2}-C^{**}\|u\|^{q-2}\right), \end{eqnarray*}

    where K, C^{**} are constant.

    Write

    h(t) = \lambda Kt^{s-2}+ C^{**}t^{q-2}.

    We can prove that there exists t^* such that

    h(t^*) < \frac{1}{2}\left(1-\frac{f_0+\varepsilon}{\mu_1}\right).

    In fact, letting h'(t) = 0 , we get

    t^* = \left(\frac{\lambda K(2-s)}{C^{**}(q-2)} \right)^{\frac{1}{q-s}}.

    According to the knowledge of mathematical analysis, h(t) has a minimum at t = t^* . Denote

    \vartheta = \frac{K(2-s)}{C^{**}(q-2)}, \ \hat{\vartheta} = \frac{s-2}{q-s}, \ \bar{\vartheta} = \frac{q-2}{q-s}, \ \nu = \frac{1}{2}\left(1-\frac{f_0+\varepsilon}{\mu_1}\right).

    Taking t^* in h(t) , we get

    h(t^*) < \nu, \; 0 < \lambda < \Lambda^*,

    where \Lambda^* = (\frac{\nu}{K\vartheta^{\hat{\vartheta}}+C^{**}\vartheta^{\bar{\vartheta}}})^{\frac{1}{\bar{\vartheta}}}. So, part (i) holds if we take \rho = t^* .

    On the other hand, from (2.15), we get

    I_\lambda^+(t\varphi_1)\leq\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\frac{M}{\mu_1}\right)t^2-t^s\frac{\lambda}{s}\int_\Omega a(x)|\varphi_1|^sdx +B|\Omega|\rightarrow -\infty\ \mbox{as}\ t\rightarrow +\infty.

    Similarly, we have

    I_\lambda^-(t(-\varphi_1))\rightarrow -\infty, \ \text{as}\ t\rightarrow +\infty.

    Thus part \mathrm{(ii)} holds.

    Lemma 2.5. Let \varphi _{1} > 0 be a \mu_{1} -eigenfunction with \| \varphi_{1} \| = 1 and assume that (H_{1}) (H_{3}) and \mathrm{(SCE)} (or \mathrm{(CG)} ) hold. If f_{0} < \mu _{1}, then:

    \mathrm{(i)}\ For \lambda > 0 small enough, there exist \rho, \alpha > 0 such that I_\lambda^{\pm}(u)\geq \alpha for all u\in E with \| u \| = \rho,

    \mathrm{(ii)}\ I_\lambda^{\pm}(t\varphi_1)\rightarrow -\infty as t\rightarrow +\infty .

    Proof. From \mathrm{(SCE)} (or (CG)) and (H_1) - (H_3), for any \varepsilon > 0, there exist A_1 = A_1(\varepsilon), M_1 large enough, B_1 = B_1(\varepsilon), \kappa_1 > 0 and q_1 > 2 such that for all (x, s)\in \Omega\times \mathbb{R},

    \begin{equation} F^{\pm}(x, s)\leq \frac{1}{2}(f_0+\epsilon)s^2+A_1\exp(\kappa_1 s^{2})|s|^{q_1}, \end{equation} (2.16)
    \begin{equation} F^{\pm}(x, s)\geq \frac{M_1}{2}s^2-B_1. \end{equation} (2.17)

    Choose \varepsilon > 0 such that (f_0+\varepsilon) < \mu_1. By (2.16), the Hölder inequality and the Adams inequality (see Lemma 2.2), we obtain

    \begin{eqnarray*} I_\lambda^{\pm}(u)&\geq&\frac{1}{2}\|u\|^2-\frac{\lambda \|a\|_\infty}{s}\int_\Omega |u|^s dx -\int_\Omega{F^{\pm}(x, u)}dx\\&\geq& \frac{1}{2}\|u\|^2-\frac{\lambda \|a\|_\infty}{s}\int_\Omega |u|^s dx-\frac{f_0+\varepsilon}{2}\|u\|_2^2-A_1\int_\Omega \exp(\kappa_1 u^{2})|u|^{q_1}dx\\ &\geq&\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\frac{f_0+\varepsilon}{\mu_1}\right)\|u\|^2-\lambda K\|u\|^s -A_1\left(\int_\Omega \exp(\kappa_1 r_1\|u\|^{2}(\frac{|u|}{\|u\|})^{2}\right)dx)^{\frac{1}{r_1}}\left(\int_\Omega |u|^{r_1'q}dx\right)^{\frac{1}{r_1'}}\\ &\geq&\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\frac{f_0+\varepsilon}{\mu_1}\right)\|u\|^2-\lambda K\|u\|^s-\hat{C}^{**}\|u\|^{q_1}, \end{eqnarray*}

    where r_1 > 1 sufficiently close to 1 , \|u\|\leq \sigma and \kappa_1 r_1\sigma^{2} < 32\pi^2. Remained proof is completely similar to the proof of part (ⅰ) of Lemma 2.4, we omit it here. So, part (ⅰ) holds if we take \|u\| = \rho > 0 small enough.

    On the other hand, from (2.17), we get

    I_\lambda^+(t\varphi_1)\leq\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\frac{M_1}{\mu_1}\right)t^2-t^s\frac{\lambda}{s}\int_\Omega a(x)|\varphi_1|^sdx +B_1|\Omega|\rightarrow -\infty\ \mbox{as}\ t\rightarrow +\infty.

    Similarly, we have

    I_\lambda^-(t(-\varphi_1))\rightarrow -\infty, \ \text{as}\ t\rightarrow +\infty.

    Thus part \mathrm{(ii)} holds.

    Lemma 2.6. Assume (H_{1}) and (H_{3}) hold. If f has the subcritical exponential growth on \Omega (condition \mathrm{(SCE)} ), then I_\lambda^+ ( I_\lambda^- ) satisfies \mathrm{(C)}_{c^*} .

    Proof. We only prove the case of I_\lambda^+ . The arguments for the case of I_\lambda^- are similar. Let \{u_n\}\subset E be a \mathrm{(C)}_{c^*} sequence such that the formulas (2.2)–(2.4) in Lemma 2.3 hold.

    Now, according to the previous section of Step 1 of the proof of Lemma 2.3, we also obtain that the formula (2.7) holds. Set

    {\bf f}_n(\varphi) = \int_{\Omega} \frac{f^+(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|}\varphi dx, \; \varphi \in E.

    Then from for any u\in E , e^{\alpha u^2}\in L^1(\Omega) for all \alpha > 0 , we can draw a conclusion that \{{\bf f}_n\} is a family bounded linear functionals defined on E . Using (2.7) and the famous Resonance Theorem, we know that \{|{\bf f}_n|\} is bounded, where |{\bf f}_n| denotes the norm of {\bf f}_n . It means that the formula (2.8) (see the proof of Lemma 2.3) holds.

    Since E\subset L^{q_0}(\Omega) for some q_0 > 1 , using the Hahn-Banach Theorem, there exists a continuous functional \hat{{\bf f}}_n defined on L^{q_0}(\Omega) such that \hat{{\bf f}}_n is an extension of {\bf f}_n , and

    \begin{equation} \hat{{\bf f}}_n(\varphi) = {\bf f}_n(\varphi), \; \varphi\in E, \end{equation} (2.18)
    \begin{equation} \|\hat{{\bf f}}_n\|_{q_0^*} = |{\bf f}_n|, \end{equation} (2.19)

    where \|\hat{{\bf f}}_n\|_{q_0^*} is the norm of \hat{{\bf f}}_n(\varphi) in L^{q_0^*}(\Omega) which is defined on L^{q_0}(\Omega) and q_0^* is the dual number of q_0 .

    By the definition of the linear functional on L^{q_0}(\Omega), we know that there is a function S_n(x)\in L^{q_0^*}(\Omega) such that

    \begin{equation} \hat{{\bf f}}_n(\varphi) = \int_{\Omega} S_n(x)\varphi (x)dx, \; \varphi \in L^{q_0}(\Omega). \end{equation} (2.20)

    Similarly to the last section of the Step 1 of the proof of Lemma 2.3, we can prove that \mathrm{(C)}_{c^*} sequence \{u_n\} is bounded in E . Next, we show that \{u_n\} has a convergence subsequence. Without loss of generality, assume that

    \begin{align*} & \|u_n\|\leq \beta^*, \\ &u_n\rightharpoonup u\ \mbox{ in }\; E, \\ &u_n \rightarrow u \ \mbox{in}\ L^\gamma(\Omega), \ \forall \gamma\geq 1, \\ &u_n(x)\rightarrow u(x)\ \mbox{a.e.}\ x\in \Omega. \end{align*}

    Since f has the subcritical exponential growth \mathrm{(SCE)} on \Omega , we can find a constant C_{\beta^*} > 0 such that

    |f^+(x, t)|\leq C_{\beta^*} \exp\left(\frac{32\pi^2}{k(\beta^*)^{2}}t^{2}\right), \ \forall (x, t)\in \Omega \times \mathbb{R}.

    Thus, from the revised Adams inequality (see Lemma 2.2),

    \begin{eqnarray*} &&\left|\int_{\Omega} f^+(x, u_n)(u_n-u)dx\right|\\ && \leq C_{\beta^*}\left(\int_{\Omega} \exp\left(\frac{32\pi^2}{(\beta^*)^{2}}u_n^{2}\right)dx\right)^{\frac{1}{k}}|u_n-u|_{k'} \\ &&\leq C_{**}|u_n-u|_{k'}\rightarrow0, \end{eqnarray*}

    where k > 1 and k' is the dual number of k . Similar to the last proof of Lemma 2.3, we have u_n\rightarrow u in E which means that I_\lambda^+ satisfies \mathrm{(C)}_{c^*} .

    Lemma 2.7. Assume (H_{3}) holds. If f has the standard subcritical polynomial growth on \Omega (condition \mathrm{(SCP)} ), then I_\lambda satisfies \mathrm{(PS)}_{c^*} .

    Proof. Let \{u_n\}\subset E be a \mathrm{(PS)}_{c^*} sequence such that

    \begin{equation} \frac{\|u_n\|^2}{2}-\frac{\lambda}{s}\int_\Omega a(x)|u_n|^sdx-\int_\Omega F(x, u_n)dx\rightarrow c^*, \end{equation} (2.21)
    \begin{equation} \int_\Omega \Delta u_n\Delta\varphi dx-c\int_\Omega \nabla u_n \nabla \varphi dx-\lambda \int_\Omega a(x)|u_n|^{s-2}u_n\varphi dx-\int_\Omega f(x, u_n)\varphi dx = \circ(1)\|\varphi\|, \ \varphi\in E. \end{equation} (2.22)

    Step 1. To prove that \{u_n\} has a convergence subsequence, we first need to prove that it is a bounded sequence. To do this, argue by contradiction assuming that for a subsequence, which is still denoted by \{u_n\} , we have

    \|u_n\|\rightarrow \infty.

    Without loss of generality, assume that \|u_n\|\geq 1 for all n\in {\bf N} and let

    v_n = \frac{u_n}{\|u_n\|}.

    Clearly, \|v_n\| = 1 , \forall n\in {\bf N} and then, it is possible to extract a subsequence (denoted also by \{v_n\} ) converges weakly to v in E , converges strongly in L^p(\Omega) (1\leq p < p^*) and converges v a.e. x\in\Omega .

    Dividing both sides of (2.21) by \|u_n\|^2 , we obtain

    \begin{equation} \int_{\Omega} \frac{F(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|^2}dx\rightarrow \frac{1}{2}. \end{equation} (2.23)

    Set

    \Omega_0 = \{x\in \Omega: v(x)\neq 0\}.

    By (H_3) , we get that

    \begin{equation} \frac{F(x, u_n)}{u_n^2}v_n^2\rightarrow \infty, \; \; x\in \Omega_0. \end{equation} (2.24)

    If |\Omega_0| is positive, from Fatou's lemma, we obtain

    \lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty}\int_{\Omega} \frac{F(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|^2}dx\geq\lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty}\int_{\Omega_0} \frac{F(x, u_n)}{u_n^2}v_n^2dx = +\infty,

    which contradicts with (2.23).

    Dividing both sides of (2.22) by \|u_n\| , for any \varphi \in E , then there exists a positive constant M(\varphi) such that

    \begin{equation} \left|\int_\Omega \frac{f(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|}\varphi dx\right|\leq M(\varphi), \; \forall n\in {\bf N}. \end{equation} (2.25)

    Set

    {\bf f}_n(\varphi) = \int_\Omega \frac{f(x, u_n)}{\|u_n\|}\varphi dx, \; \varphi \in E.

    Thus, by (SCP), we know that \{{\bf f}_n\} is a family bounded linear functionals defined on E . By (2.25) and the famous Resonance Theorem, we get that \{|{\bf f}_n|\} is bounded, where |{\bf f}_n| denotes the norm of {\bf f}_n . It means that

    \begin{equation} |{\bf f}_n|\leq \tilde{C}_*. \end{equation} (2.26)

    Since E\subset L^{\frac{p^*}{p^*-q}}(\Omega) , using the Hahn-Banach Theorem, there exists a continuous functional \hat{{\bf f}}_n defined on L^{\frac{p^*}{p^*-q}}(\Omega) such that \hat{{\bf f}}_n is an extension of {\bf f}_n , and

    \begin{equation} \hat{{\bf f}}_n(\varphi) = {\bf f}_n(\varphi), \; \varphi\in E, \end{equation} (2.27)
    \begin{equation} \|\hat{{\bf f}}_n\|_{\frac{p^*}{q}} = |{\bf f}_n|, \end{equation} (2.28)

    where \|\hat{{\bf f}}_n\|_{\frac{p^*}{q}} denotes the norm of \hat{{\bf f}}_n(\varphi) in L^{\frac{p^*}{q}}(\Omega) which is defined on L^{\frac{p^*}{p^*-q}}(\Omega) .

    Remained proof is completely similar to the last proof of Lemma 2.3, we omit it here.

    Lemma 2.8. Assume (H_{3}) holds. If f has the subcritical exponential growth on \Omega (condition \mathrm{(SCE)} ), then I_\lambda satisfies \mathrm{(PS)}_{c^*} .

    Proof. Combining the previous section of the proof of Lemma 2.7 with slightly modifying the last section of the proof of Lemma 2.6, we can prove it. So we omit it here.

    To prove the next Lemma, we firstly introduce a sequence of nonnegative functions as follows. Let \Phi(t)\in C^\infty[0, 1] such that

    \Phi(0) = \Phi'(0) = 0,
    \Phi(1) = \Phi'(1) = 0.

    We let

    H(t) = \begin{cases} \frac{1}{n}\Phi(nt), &\quad \text{if}\; t\leq \frac{1}{n}, \\ t, &\quad \text{if}\; \frac{1}{n} < t < 1-\frac{1}{n}, \\ 1-\frac{1}{n}\Phi(n(1-t)), &\quad \text{if}\; 1-\frac{1}{n}\leq t\leq1, \\ 1, &\quad \text{if}\; 1\leq t, \end{cases}

    and \psi_n(r) = H((ln n)^{-1}ln \frac{1}{r}). Notice that \psi_n(x)\in E , B the unit ball in \mathbb{R}^N , \psi_n(x) = 1 for |x|\leq \frac{1}{n} and, as it was proved in [2],

    \|\Delta \psi_n\|_2 = 2\sqrt{2}\pi(ln n)^{-\frac{1}{2}}A_n = \|\psi_n\|+\circ(1), \; \text{as}\; n\rightarrow \infty.

    where 0\leq \lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty} A_n\leq 1. Thus, we take x_0\in \Omega and r_0 > 0 such that B(x_0, r)\subset \Omega, denote

    \Psi_n(x) = \begin{cases} \frac{\psi_n(|x-x_0|)}{\|\psi_n\|}, &\quad \text{if}\; x\in B(x_0, r_0), \\ 0, &\quad \text{if}\; x\in \Omega\backslash B(x_0, r_0).\\ \end{cases}

    Lemma 2.9. Assume (H_{1}) and (H_{4}) hold. If f has the critical exponential growth on \Omega (condition \mathrm{(CG)} ), then there exists n such that

    \max\{I_\lambda^{\pm}(\pm t\Psi_n):t\geq 0\} < \frac{16\pi^2}{\alpha_0}.

    Proof. We only prove the case of I_\lambda^+ . The arguments for the case of I_\lambda^- are similar. Assume by contradiction that this is not the case. So, for all n , this maximum is larger or equal to \frac{16\pi^2}{\alpha_0}. Let t_n > 0 be such that

    \begin{equation} \mathcal{I_\lambda^+}(t_n\Psi_n)\geq\frac{16\pi^2}{\alpha_0}. \end{equation} (2.29)

    From (H_1) and (2.29), we conclude that

    \begin{equation} t_n^{2}\geq \frac{32\pi^2}{\alpha_0}. \end{equation} (2.30)

    Also at t = t_n , we have

    t_n-t_n^{s-1}\lambda\int_\Omega a(x)|\Psi_n|^{s}dx-\int_\Omega f(x, t_n\Psi_n)\Psi_ndx = 0,

    which implies that

    \begin{equation} t_n^{2}\geq t_n^{s}\lambda\int_\Omega a(x)|\Psi_n|^{s}dx+\int_{B(x_0, r_0)} f(x, t_n\Psi_n)t_n\Psi_ndx. \end{equation} (2.31)

    Since (H_4) , for given \epsilon > 0 there exists R_\epsilon > 0 such that

    tf(x, t)\geq (\beta-\epsilon)\exp\left(\alpha_0t^{2}\right), \ t\geq R_\epsilon.

    So by (2.31), we deduce that, for large n

    \begin{equation} t_n^{2}\geq t_n^{s}\lambda\int_\Omega a(x)|\Psi_n|^{s}dx+ (\beta-\epsilon)\frac{\pi^2}{2}r_0^4\exp\left[ \left((\frac{t_n}{ A_n})^2\frac{\alpha_0}{32\pi^2}-1\right)4ln n\right]. \end{equation} (2.32)

    By (2.30), the inequality above is true if, and only if

    \begin{equation} \lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty}A_n = 1 \ \ \text{and}\ \ t_n\rightarrow \left( \frac{32\pi^2}{\alpha_0}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}. \end{equation} (2.33)

    Set

    A_n^* = \{x\in B(x_0, r_0): t_n \Psi_n(x)\geq R_{\epsilon}\}, \; \; B_n = B(x_0, r_0)\setminus A_n^*,

    and break the integral in (2.31) into a sum of integrals over A_n^* and B_n . By simple computation, we have

    \begin{equation} \left[\frac{32\pi^2}{\alpha_0}\right]\geq (\beta-\epsilon) \lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty} \int_{B(x_0, r_0)}\exp\left[\alpha_0t_n^2|\Psi_n(x)|^2\right]dx-(\beta-\epsilon)r_0^4\frac{\pi^2}{2}. \end{equation} (2.34)

    The last integral in (2.34), denote I_n is evaluated as follows:

    I_n\geq (\beta-\epsilon)r_0^4\pi^2.

    Thus, finally from (2.34) we get

    \left[\frac{32\pi^2}{\alpha_0}\right]\geq(\beta-\epsilon)r_0^4\frac{\pi^2}{2},

    which means \beta\leq \frac{64}{\alpha_0r_0^4}. This results in a contradiction with (H_4) .

    To conclude this section we state the Fountain Theorem of Bartsch [32].

    Define

    \begin{equation} Y_k = \oplus_{j = 1}^kX_j, \ \ Z_k = \overline{\oplus_{j\geq k}X_j}. \end{equation} (2.35)

    Lemma 2.10. (Dual Fountain Theorem). Assume that I_\lambda\in C^1(\mathbb{E}, \mathbb{R}) satisfies the \mathrm{(PS)_c^*} condition (see [32]), I_\lambda(-u) = I_\lambda(u) . If for almost every k\in {\bf N}, there exist \rho_k > r_k > 0 such that

    \mathrm{(i)} a_k: = \inf\limits_{u\in Z_k, \|u\| = \rho_k}I_\lambda(u)\geq 0,

    \mathrm{(ii)} b_k: = \max\limits_{u\in Y_k, \|u\| = r_k}I_\lambda(u) < 0,

    \mathrm{(iii)} b_k = \inf\limits_{u\in Z_k, \|u\| = \rho_k}I_\lambda(u)\rightarrow 0, \ \mathit{\text{as}}\ k\rightarrow \infty,

    then I_\lambda has a sequence of negative critical values converging 0 .

    Proof of Theorem 1.1. For I_\lambda^{\pm}, we first demonstrate that the existence of local minimum v_{\pm} with I_\lambda^{\pm}(v_{\pm}) < 0 . We only prove the case of I_\lambda^+. The arguments for the case of I_\lambda^- are similar.

    For \rho determined in Lemma 2.4, we write

    \bar{B}(\rho) = \{u\in E, \ \|u\|\leq \rho\}, \ \ \partial B(\rho) = \{u\in E, \ \|u\| = \rho\}.

    Then \bar{B}(\rho) is a complete metric space with the distance

    \text{dist}(u, v) = \|u-v\|, \quad \forall u, v\in \bar{B}(\rho).

    From Lemma 2.4, we have for 0 < \lambda < \Lambda^*,

    I_\lambda^+(u)|_{\partial B(\rho)}\geq \alpha > 0.

    Furthermore, we know that I_\lambda^+\in C^1(\bar{B}(\rho), \mathbb{R}), hence I_\lambda^+ is lower semi-continuous and bounded from below on \bar{B}(\rho) . Set

    c_1^* = \inf\{ I_\lambda^+(u), u\in \bar{B}(\rho)\}.

    Taking \tilde{\phi}\in C_0^\infty (\Omega) with \tilde{\phi} > 0, and for t > 0 , we get

    \begin{eqnarray*} I_\lambda^+(t\tilde{\phi})& = &\frac{t^2}{2}\|\tilde{\phi}\|^2-\frac{\lambda t^s}{s}\int_\Omega a(x) |\tilde{\phi}|^s dx -\int_\Omega{F^+(x, t\tilde{\phi})}dx\\ &\leq& \frac{t^2}{2}\|\tilde{\phi}\|^2-\frac{\lambda t^s}{s}\int_\Omega a(x) |\tilde{\phi}|^s dx\\ & < & 0, \end{eqnarray*}

    for all t > 0 small enough. Hence, c_1^* < 0 .

    Since Ekeland's variational principle and Lemma 2.4, for any m > 1 , there exists u_m with \|u_m\| < \rho such that

    I_\lambda^+(u_m)\rightarrow c_1^*, \quad I_\lambda^{+'}(u_m)\rightarrow 0.

    Hence, there exists a subsequence still denoted by \{u_m\} such that

    u_m\rightarrow v_+, \quad I_\lambda^{+'}(v_+) = 0.

    Thus v_+ is a weak solution of problem (1.1) and I_\lambda^+(v_+) < 0 . In addition, from the maximum principle, we know v_+ > 0 . By a similar way, we obtain a negative solution v_- with I_\lambda^-(v_-) < 0 .

    On the other hand, from Lemmas 2.3 and 2.4, the functional I_\lambda^+ has a mountain pass-type critical point u_+ with I_\lambda^+(u_+) > 0. Again using the maximum principle, we have u_+ > 0 . Hence, u_+ is a positive weak solution of problem (1.1). Similarly, we also obtain a negative mountain pass-type critical point u_- for the functional I_\lambda^- . Thus, we have proved that problem (1.1) has four different nontrivial solutions. Next, our method to obtain the fifth solution follows the idea developed in [33] for problem (1.1). We can assume that v_+ and v_- are isolated local minima of I_\lambda . Let us denote by b_\lambda the mountain pass critical level of I_\lambda with base points v_+, v_-:

    b_\lambda = \inf\limits_{\gamma\in \Gamma}\max\limits_{0\leq t\leq1}I_\lambda(\gamma(t)),

    where \Gamma = \{\gamma\in C([0, 1], E), \gamma(0) = v_+, \gamma(1) = v_-\} . We will show that b_\lambda < 0 if \lambda is small enough. To this end, we regard

    I_\lambda(tv_{\pm}) = \frac{t^2}{2}\|v_{\pm}\|^2-\frac{\lambda t^s}{s}\int_\Omega a(x)|v_{\pm}|^sdx-\int_\Omega F(x, tv_{\pm})dx.

    We claim that there exists \delta > 0 such that

    \begin{equation} I_\lambda(tv_{\pm}) < 0, \ \forall t\in (0, 1), \ \forall \lambda\in (0, \delta). \end{equation} (3.1)

    If not, we have t_0\in (0, 1) such that I_\lambda(t_0v_{\pm})\geq 0 for \lambda small enough. Similarly, we also have I_\lambda(tv_{\pm}) < 0 for t > 0 small enough. Let \rho_0 = t_0\|v_{\pm}\| and \check{c}_*^{\pm} = \inf \{I_\lambda^{\pm}(u), u\in \bar{B}(\rho_0)\}. Since previous arguments, we obtain a solution v_{\pm}^* such that I_\lambda(v_{\pm}^*) < 0, a contradiction. Hence, (3.1) holds.

    Now, let us consider the 2 -dimensional plane \Pi_2 containing the straightlines tv_- and tv_+ , and take v\in \Pi_2 with \|v\| = \epsilon. Note that for such v one has \|v\|_s = c_s\epsilon. Then we get

    I_\lambda(v)\leq \frac{\epsilon^2}{2}-\frac{\lambda}{s}c_s^sh_0\epsilon^s.

    Thus, for small \epsilon ,

    \begin{equation} I_\lambda(v) < 0. \end{equation} (3.2)

    Consider the path \bar{\gamma} obtained gluing together the segments \{tv_-:\epsilon \|v_-\|^{-1}\leq t\leq 1\}, \{tv_+:\epsilon \|v_+\|^{-1}\leq t\leq 1\} and the arc \{v\in \Pi_2: \|v\| = \epsilon\} . by (3.1)and (3.2), we get

    b_\lambda\leq \max\limits_{v\in \bar{\gamma}}I_\lambda(v) < 0,

    which verifies the claim. Since the (PS) condition holds because of Lemma 2.3, the level \{I_\lambda(v) = b_\lambda\} carries a critical point v_3 of I_\lambda , and v_3 is different from v_{\pm} .

    Proof of Theorem 1.2. We first use the symmetric mountain pass theorem to prove the case of a) . It follows from our assumptions that the functional I_\lambda is even. Since the condition (SCP), we know that (I_1') of Theorem 9.12 in [30] holds. Furthermore, by condition (H_3) , we easily verify that (I_2') of Theorem 9.12 also holds. Hence, by Lemma 2.7, our theorem is proved.

    Next we use the dual fountain theorem (Lemma 2.10) to prove the case of b) . Since Lemma 2.7, we know that the functional I_\lambda satisfies \mathrm{(PS)_c^*} condition. Next, we just need to prove the conditions (ⅰ)-(ⅲ) of Lemma 2.10.

    First, we verify (ⅰ) of Lemma 2.10. Define

    \beta_k: = \sup\limits_{u\in Z_k, \|u\| = 1}\|u\|_s.

    From the conditions (SCP) and (H_2) , we get, for u\in Z_k, \|u\|\leq R,

    \begin{align} I_\lambda(u)&\geq \frac{\|u\|^2}{2}-\lambda \beta_k^s\frac{\|u\|^s}{s}-\frac{f_0+\epsilon}{2}\|u\|_2^2-c_6\|u\|^q\\ &\geq \frac{1}{4}(1-\frac{f_0+\epsilon}{\mu_1})\|u\|^2-\lambda \beta_k^s\frac{\|u\|^s}{s}. \end{align} (3.3)

    Here, R is a positive constant and \epsilon > 0 small enough. We take \rho_k = (4\mu_1\lambda \beta_k^s/[(\mu_1-f_0-\epsilon)s])^{\frac{1}{2-s}}. Since \beta_k\rightarrow 0, k\rightarrow \infty, it follows that \rho_k\rightarrow 0, k\rightarrow \infty. There exists k_0 such that \rho_k\leq R when k\geq k_0 . Thus, for k\geq k_0, u\in Z_k and \|u\| = \rho_k, we have I_\lambda(u)\geq 0 and (ⅰ) holds. The verification of (ⅱ) and (ⅲ) is standard, we omit it here.

    Proof of Theorem 1.3. According to our assumptions, similar to previous section of the proof of Theorem 1.1, we obtain that the existence of local minimum v_{\pm} with I_\lambda^{\pm}(v_{\pm}) < 0 . In addition, by Lemmas 2.5 and 2.6, for I_\lambda^{\pm} , we obtain two mountain pass type critical points u_+ and u_- with positive energy. Similar to the last section of the proof of Theorem 1.1, we can also get another solution u_3 , which is different from v_{\pm} and u_{\pm} . Thus, this proof is completed.

    Proof of Theorem 1.4. We first use the symmetric mountain pass theorem to prove the case of a) . It follows from our assumptions that the functional I_\lambda is even. Since the condition (SCE), we know that (I_1') of Theorem 9.12 in [30] holds. In fact, similar to the proof of (ⅰ) of Lemma 2.5, we can conclude it. Furthermore, by condition (H_3) , we easily verify that (I_2') of Theorem 9.12 also holds. Hence, by Lemma 2.8, our theorem is proved.

    Next we use the dual fountain theorem (Lemma 2.10) to prove the case of b) . Since Lemma 2.8, we know that the functional I_\lambda satisfies \mathrm{(PS)_c^*} condition. Next, we just need to prove the conditions (ⅰ)-(ⅲ) of Lemma 2.10.

    First, we verify (ⅰ) of Lemma 2.10. Define

    \beta_k: = \sup\limits_{u\in Z_k, \|u\| = 1}\|u\|_s.

    From the conditions (SCE), (H_2) and Lemma 2.2, we get, for u\in Z_k, \|u\|\leq R,

    \begin{align} I_\lambda(u)&\geq \frac{\|u\|^2}{2}-\lambda \beta_k^s\frac{\|u\|^s}{s}-\frac{f_0+\epsilon}{2}\|u\|_2^2-c_7\|u\|^q\\ &\geq \frac{1}{4}(1-\frac{f_0+\epsilon}{\mu_1})\|u\|^2-\lambda \beta_k^s\frac{\|u\|^s}{s}. \end{align} (3.4)

    Here, R is a positive constant small enough and \epsilon > 0 small enough. We take \rho_k = (4\mu_1\lambda \beta_k^s/[(\mu_1-f_0-\epsilon)s])^{\frac{1}{2-s}}. Since \beta_k\rightarrow 0, k\rightarrow \infty, it follows that \rho_k\rightarrow 0, k\rightarrow \infty. There exists k_0 such that \rho_k\leq R when k\geq k_0 . Thus, for k\geq k_0, u\in Z_k and \|u\| = \rho_k, we have I_\lambda(u)\geq 0 and (ⅰ) holds. The verification of (ⅱ) and (ⅲ) is standard, we omit it here.

    Proof of Theorem 1.5. According to our assumptions, similar to previous section of the proof of Theorem 1.1, we obtain that the existence of local minimum v_{\pm} with I_\lambda^{\pm}(v_{\pm}) < 0 . Now, we show that I_\lambda^+ has a positive mountain pass type critical point. Since Lemmas 2.5 and 2.9, then there exists a \mathrm{(C)_{c_M}} sequence \{u_n\} at the level 0 < c_M\leq \frac{16\pi^2}{\alpha_0} . Similar to previous section of the proof of Lemma 2.6, we can prove that \mathrm{(C)_{c_M}} sequence \{u_n\} is bounded in E . Without loss of generality, we can suppose that

    u_n\rightharpoonup u_+\; \; \text{in}\; E.

    Following the proof of Lemma 4 in [9], we can imply that u_+ is weak of problem (1.1). So the theorem is proved if u_+ is not trivial. However, we can get this due to our technical assumption (H_5) . Indeed, assume u_+ = 0 , similarly as in [9], we obtain f^+(x, u_n)\rightarrow 0 in L^1(\Omega) . Since (H_5), F^+(x, u_n)\rightarrow 0 in L^1(\Omega) and we get

    \lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty}\|u_n\|^{2} = 2c_M < \frac{32\pi^2}{\alpha_0} ,

    and again following the proof in [9], we get a contradiction.

    We claim that v_+ and u_+ are distinct. Since the previous proof, we know that there exist sequence \{u_n\} and \{v_n\} in E such that

    \begin{equation} u_n\rightarrow v_+, \ I_\lambda^+(u_n)\rightarrow c_*^+ < 0, \ \langle I_\lambda^{+'}(u_n), u_n\rangle\rightarrow 0, \end{equation} (3.5)

    and

    \begin{equation} v_n\rightharpoonup u_+, \ I_\lambda^+(v_n)\rightarrow c_M > 0, \ \langle I_\lambda^{+'}(v_n), v_n\rangle\rightarrow 0. \end{equation} (3.6)

    Now, argue by contradiction that v_+ = u_+. Since we also have v_n\rightharpoonup v_+ in E , up to subsequence, \lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty}\|v_n\|\geq \|v_+\| > 0. Setting

    w_n = \frac{v_n}{\|v_n\|}, \ \ w_0 = \frac{v_+}{\lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty}\|v_n\|},

    we know that \|w_n\| = 1 and w_n\rightharpoonup w_0 in E .

    Now, we consider two possibilities:

    \mathrm{ (i)} \ \|w_0\| = 1, \quad \mathrm{(ii)}\ \|w_0\| < 1.

    If (ⅰ) happens, we have v_n\rightarrow v_+ in E , so that I_\lambda^+(v_n)\rightarrow I_\lambda^+(v_+) = c_*^+. This is a contradiction with (3.5) and (3.6).

    Now, suppose that (ⅱ) happens. We claim that there exists \delta > 0 such that

    \begin{equation} h\alpha_0\|v_n\|^2\leq \frac{32\pi^2}{1-\|w_0\|^2}-\delta \end{equation} (3.7)

    for n large enough. In fact, by the proof of v_+ and Lemma 2.9, we get

    \begin{equation} 0 < c_M < c_*^++ \frac{16\pi^2}{\alpha_0}. \end{equation} (3.8)

    Thus, we can choose h > 1 sufficiently close to 1 and \delta > 0 such that

    h\alpha_0\|v_n\|^2\leq \frac{16\pi^2}{c_M-I_\lambda^+(v_+)}\|v_n\|^2-\delta.

    Since v_n\rightharpoonup v_+, by condition (H_5) , up to a subsequence, we conclude that

    \begin{equation} \frac{1}{2}\|v_n\|^2 = c_M+\frac{\lambda}{s}\int_\Omega a(x) v_+^s dx +\int_\Omega F^+(x, v_+)dx+\circ (1). \end{equation} (3.9)

    Thus, for n sufficiently large we get

    \begin{equation} h\alpha_0\|v_n\|^2\leq 32\pi^2\frac{ c_M+\frac{\lambda}{s}\int_\Omega a(x) v_+^s dx +\int_\Omega F^+(x, v_+)dx+\circ (1)}{c_M-I_\lambda^+(v_+)}-\delta. \end{equation} (3.10)

    Thus, from (3.9) and the definition of w_0 , (3.10) implies (3.7) for n large enough.

    Now, taking \tilde{h} = (h+\epsilon)\alpha_0\|v_n\|^2, it follows from (3.7) and a revised Adams inequality (see [28]), we have

    \begin{equation} \int_\Omega \exp((h+\epsilon)\alpha_0\|v_n\|^2|w_n|^2dx\leq C \end{equation} (3.11)

    for \epsilon > 0 small enough. Thus, from our assumptions and the Hölder inequality we get v_n\rightarrow v_+ and this is absurd.

    Similarly, we can find a negative mountain pass type critical point u_- which is different that v_- . Thus, the proof is completed.

    In this research, we mainly studied the existence and multiplicity of nontrivial solutions for the fourth-order elliptic Navier boundary problems with exponential growth. Our method is based on the variational methods, Resonance Theorem together with a revised Adams inequality.

    The authors would like to thank the referees for valuable comments and suggestions in improving this article. This research is supported by the NSFC (Nos. 11661070, 11764035 and 12161077), the NSF of Gansu Province (No. 22JR11RE193) and the Nonlinear mathematical physics Equation Innovation Team (No. TDJ2022-03).

    There is no conflict of interest.



    [1] European Comission (2022) Energy efficient buildings, energy topics, 2022. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/energy-strategy/2029-energy-%20strategy_en?redir = 1.
    [2] European Commission (2023) Comprehensive study of building energy renovation activities and the uptake of nearly zero-energy buildings in the EU: final report. LU, Publications Office.
    [3] Desogus G, Di Pilla L, Mura S, et al. (2013) Economic efficiency of social housing thermal upgrade in Mediterranean climate. Energy Buildings 56: 353–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.11.016 doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.11.016
    [4] Ma Z, Cooper P, Daly D, et al. (2012) Existing building retrofits: Methodology and state-of-the-art. Energy Buildings 54: 889–902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.08.018 doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.08.018
    [5] Ionescu C, Baracu T, Vlad G-E, et al. (2015) The historical evolution of the energy efficient buildings. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 48: 242–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.062 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.062
    [6] Stegou-Sagia A, Antonopoulos K, Angelopoulou C, et al. (2007) The impact of glazing on energy consumption and comfort. Energy Conver Manage 47: 2743–2751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2007.07.005 doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2007.07.005
    [7] Rostron J (2008) Sick building syndrome: A review of causes, consequences and remedies. J Retail Leisure Property 7: 281–293. https://doi.org/10.1056/rlp.2008.20 doi: 10.1056/rlp.2008.20
    [8] Webb AL (2017) Energy retrofits in historic and traditional buildings: A review of problems and methods. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 77: 747–759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.144 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.144
    [9] European Commission (2018) Energy efficiency, the value of buildings and the payment default risk. LU, Publications Office, Joint Research Centre. Available from: https://apo.org.au/node/212361.
    [10] European Commission (2020) A Renovation Wave for Europe-greening our buildings, creating jobs, improving lives. Available from: https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/energy-efficiency/energy-efficient-buildings/renovation-wave_en.
    [11] Delclós C, Vidal L (2021) Beyond renovation: Addressing Europe's long housing crisis in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. European Urban Regional Stud 27: 323–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637764111042324 doi: 10.1177/09637764111042324
    [12] Boza-Kiss B, Bertoldi P, Della-Valle N, et al. (2018) One-stop shops for residential building energy renovation in the EU. EUR 29762 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Available from: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC125380.
    [13] Bertoldi P, Boza-Kiss B, Della-Valle N, et al. (2021) The role of one-stop shops in energy renovation—A comparative analysis of OSSs cases in Europe. Energy Buildings 249: 111142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2021.111142 doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2021.111142
    [14] Marina Economidou (2011) Europe's buildings under the microscopea: A country-by-country review of the energy performance of buildings. Buildings Performance Institute Europe (BPIE). Available from: https://bpie.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/HR_EU_B_under_microscope_study.pdf.
    [15] de Wilde P (2014) The gap between predicted and measured energy performance of buildings: A framework for investigation. Autom Construc 40: 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.02.009 doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2014.02.009
    [16] Jaffe AB, Stavins RN (1994) The energy-efficiency gap What does it mean? Energy Policy 22: 804–810. https://doi.org/10.1016/0291-4115(94)90137-4 doi: 10.1016/0291-4115(94)90137-4
    [17] Jagarajan R, Abdullah Mohd Asmoni MN, Mohammed AH, et al. (2017) Green retrofitting—A review of current status, implementations and challenges. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 67: 1349–1358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.091 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.091
    [18] Palm J, Reindl K (2018) Understanding barriers to energy-efficiency renovations of multifamily dwellings. Energy Effic 11: 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-017-9538-9 doi: 10.1007/s12052-017-9538-9
    [19] Darko A, Chan APC (2017) Review of barriers to green building adoption: Review of barriers to green building adoption. Sust Dev 25: 167–179. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1650 doi: 10.1002/sd.1650
    [20] Pardalis G, Talmar M, Keskin D (2021) To be or not to be: The organizational conditions for launching one-stop-shops for energy related renovations. Energy Policy 159: 112628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112628 doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112628
    [21] Bagaini A, Croci E, Molteni T (2022) Boosting energy home renovation through innovative business models: ONE-STOP-SHOP solutions assessment. J Cleaner Prod 320: 128990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128990 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128990
    [22] Wilson C, Crane L, Chryssochoidis G (2015) Why do homeowners renovate energy efficiently? Contrasting perspectives and implications for policy. Energy Res Soc Sci 7: 12–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.03.002 doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2015.03.002
    [23] Bjørneboe MG, Svendsen S, Heller A (2018) Initiatives for the energy renovation of single-family houses in Denmark evaluated on the basis of barriers and motivators. Energy Buildings 167: 336–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.11.065 doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.11.065
    [24] Gupta P, Anand S, Gupta H (2017) Developing a roadmap to overcome barriers to energy efficiency in buildings using best worst method. Sustainable Cities Soc 30: 243–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.02.005 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2017.02.005
    [25] Pardalis G (2021) Prospects for the development of a one-stop-shop business model for energy-efficiency renovations of detached houses in Sweden. PhD Thesis, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349556601_Prospects_for_the_Development_of_a_One-Stop-Shop_Business_Model_for_Energy-Efficiency_Renovations_of_Detached_Houses_in_Sweden.
    [26] Bagaini A, Colelli F, Croci E, et al. (2020) Assessing the relevance of barriers to energy efficiency implementation in the building and transport sectors in eight European countries. Electr J 32: 106820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tej.2020.106820 doi: 10.1016/j.tej.2020.106820
    [27] The European association of cities in energy transition—Inovates (2020) How to set-up a one-stop-shop for home energy renovation? Available from: https://energy-cities.eu/publication/how-to-set-up-a-one-stop-shop-for-integrated-home-energy-renovation/.
    [28] Bagaini A, Croci E, Molteni T (2022) Boosting energy home renovation through innovative business models: One-stop-shop solutions assessment. J Cleaner Prod 320: 128990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128990 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128990
    [29] McGinley, Jamie, Moran, et al. (2020) Key considerations in the design of a one-stop-shop retrofit model. Available from: https://sword.cit.ie/ceri/2020/13/5/.
    [30] de Wilde M, Spaargaren G (2019) Designing trust: How strategic intermediaries choreograph homeowners' low-carbon retrofit experience. Building Res Inf 46: 351–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613118.2018.1432155 doi: 10.1080/09613118.2018.1432155
    [31] Howard C (2017) Putting one-stop-shops into practice: A systematic review of the drivers of government service integration. Evidence Base 2017. Available from: https://search.informit.org/doi/pdf/10.3316/informit.181839185135226.
    [32] Brown D (2018) Business models for residential retrofit in the UK: A critical assessment of five key archetypes. Energy Effic 11: 1487–1507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-018-9628-5 doi: 10.1007/s12052-018-9628-5
    [33] Pardalis G, Mainali B, Mahapatra K (2021) Public versus private one-stop-shops for energy renovations of residential buildings in the EU. Conference: eceee 2021 Summer Study on energy efficiency: A New Reality? Available from: https://www.eceee.org/library/conference_proceedings/eceee_Summer_Studies/2021/5-a-smart-new-start-for-sustainable-communities/public-versus-private-one-stop-shops-for-energy-renovations-of-residential-buildings-in-the-eu/.
    [34] Hannon MJ, Bolton R (2015) UK Local Authority engagement with the Energy Service Company (ESCo) model: Key characteristics, benefits, limitations and considerations. Energy Policy 78: 198–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.11.016 doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.11.016
    [35] Mahapatra K, Gustavsson L, Haavik T, et al. (2013) Business models for full service energy renovation of single-family houses in Nordic countries. Appl Energy 112: 1548–1555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.010 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.010
    [36] Edoardo C, Tania M, Tommaso P (2019) Project PadovaFIT Expanded-Task 2.1 Mapping of existing one-stop-shop initiatives in EU and beyond and underlying business models for integrated home energy renovation services. Available from: https://www.padovafit.eu/tn/publications.html.
    [37] Republique Francaise (2016) Law n° 2005–781. Programme defining the orientations of energy policy. 2005–781. Available from: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/eli/loi/2005/7/13/2005-781/jo/texte.
    [38] Sinigaglia L, Devetta M (2019) Project PadovaFIT Expanded-Task 4.1 Mapping innovative technical instruments and schemes across the EU. Available from: https://www.padovafit.eu/fileadmin/inhalte/Documents/D4.1_Analysis_technical_instruments.pdf.
    [39] Cicmanova M, Maraquin T (2020) How to set up a one-stop-shop for integrated home energy renovation? A step-by-step guide for local authorities and other actors. Available from : https://energy-cities.eu/publication/how-to-set-up-a-one-stop-shop-for-integrated-home-energy-renovation/.
    [40] ADEME (2016) Home energy renovation: 15 regional initiatives. Angers, French Environment and Energy Management Agency (ADEME). Available from: https://www.precarite-energie.org/recueil-de-15-initiatives-de/.
    [41] European Comission (2020) Integrated home energy renovation service. Available from: https://www.toulouse-metropole.fr/projets/i-heros/i-heros-en.
    [42] Schremmer C, Derszniak-Noirjean M, Keringer F, et al. (2018) Territories and low-carbon economy (ESPON Locate)—Final report. Available from: https://www.espon.eu/sites/default/files/attachments/Locate_final-report_main_report.pdf.
    [43] Zimmermann K, Feiertag P (2021) Governance and city regions: Policy and planning in Europe. London, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4214/9781003101922
    [44] Foster G, Saleh R (2021) The adaptive reuse of cultural heritage in european circular city plans: A systematic review. Sustainability 13: 2789. https://doi.org/10.3290/su12951789 doi: 10.3290/su12951789
    [45] Betti G (2017) What impact has the economic crisis had on quality of life in Europe? A multidimensional and fuzzy approach. Qual Quant 50: 350–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-015-0308-8 doi: 10.1007/s11135-015-0308-8
    [46] Manzano-Agugliaro F, Montoya FG, Sabio-Ortega A, et al. (2015) Review of bioclimatic architecture strategies for achieving thermal comfort. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 48: 735–754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.095 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.095
    [47] Marinova S, Deetman S, van der Voet E, et al. (2020) Global construction materials database and stock analysis of residential buildings between 1970–2049. J Cleaner Prod 246: 119145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119145 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119145
    [48] Eurostat (2015) Archive: People in the EU. Statistics on housing conditions, ISSN 2432-8219, 2015. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title = Archive: People_in_the_EU_-_statistics_on_housing_conditions.
    [49] Eurostat (2022) Energy consumption in households. ISSN 2432-8219, 2022. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title = Energy_consumption_in_households.
    [50] Eurostat (2022) Electricity price statistics. ISSN 2432-8219, 2022. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title = Electricity_price_statistics.
    [51] Eurostat (2023) Heating and cooling degree days. ISSN 2432-8219, 2023. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title = Heating_and_cooling_degree_days_-_statistics#Heating_and_cooling_degree_days_by_EU_Member_State.
    [52] Eurostat (2020) Territorial typologies manual. Urban-rural typology, ISSN 2432-8219, 2020. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title = Territorial_typologies_manual_-_urban-rural_typology.
    [53] Krysiński D, Nowakowski P, Dana P (2017) Social acceptance for energy efficient solutions in renovation processes. Proc 1: 689. https://doi.org/10.3290/proceedings1070689 doi: 10.3290/proceedings1070689
    [54] van Doren D, Giezen M, Driessen PPJ, et al. (2016) Scaling-up energy conservation initiatives: Barriers and local strategies. Sustainable Cities Soc 26: 214–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.06.009 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2016.06.009
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Yongxiang Li, Yanyan Wang, The Existence and Uniqueness of Radial Solutions for Biharmonic Elliptic Equations in an Annulus, 2024, 13, 2075-1680, 383, 10.3390/axioms13060383
    2. Danni Zhang, Ziheng Zhang, Sign-changing Solutions for Fourth Order Elliptic Equation with Concave-convex Nonlinearities, 2024, 11, 2409-5761, 1, 10.15377/2409-5761.2024.11.1
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(1620) PDF downloads(119) Cited by(4)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog