本文确定并研究了可用于创建下一代更高效的商业建筑能源规范和标准的几种格式或结构。太平洋西北国家实验室（PNNL）由美国能源部建筑能源规范项目（BECP）资助，为ANSI/ASHRAE/IES标准90.1的制定提供技术支持。虽然PNNL对ASHRAE标准90.1的大部分支持侧重于开发和评估新需求，但其部分工作涉及能源标准的格式。在其当前的工作计划中，ASHRAE 90.1委员会批准了标准90.1-2013相对于标准90.1-2004提高50%的能源目标，并且可能会考虑为标准的未来版本设定更高的改进目标。为了以能够获得利益相关者共识的方式经济高效地实现50%的目标，必须考虑规定以外的格式。 包括减少对规定性要求的依赖的替代格式可能会使新规范和标准更容易达到这些积极的效率水平。重点关注能源规范和标准格式，旨在探索提出标准的方法，以促进合规性、加强验证，并在建筑节能的同时刺激创新。新的格式也可能使建筑设计师和业主更容易按照新规范和标准要求的效率水平进行设计和建造。本文探讨了一些潜在的格式和结构，包括规定性的、基于绩效的（包括绩效等效和绩效目标的子格式）、基于能力约束的和基于结果的。本文还从代码用户和代码执行者的角度讨论了每种格式的优缺点。引用:德克萨斯州达拉斯ASHRAE会议论文。

This paper identifies and examines several formats or structures that could be used to create the next generation of more efficient energy codes and standards for commercial buildings. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) is funded by the U.S. Department of Energy's Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) to provide technical support to the development of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1. While the majority of PNNL's ASHRAE Standard 90.1 support focuses on developing and evaluating new requirements, a portion of its work involves consideration of the format of energy standards. In its current working plan, the ASHRAE 90.1 committee has approved an energy goal of 50% improvement in Standard 90.1-2013 relative to Standard 90.1-2004, and will likely be considering higher improvement targets for future versions of the standard. To cost-effectively achieve the 50% goal in manner that can gain stakeholder consensus, formats other than prescriptive must be considered. Alternative formats that include reducing the reliance on prescriptive requirements may make it easier to achieve these aggressive efficiency levels in new codes and standards. The focus on energy code and standard formats is meant to explore approaches to presenting the criteria that will foster compliance, enhance verification, and stimulate innovation while saving energy in buildings. New formats may also make it easier for building designers and owners to design and build the levels of efficiency called for in the new codes and standards. This paper examines a number of potential formats and structures, including prescriptive, performance based (with sub-formats of performance equivalency and performance targets), capacity constraint based, and outcome based. The paper also discusses the pros and cons of each format from the viewpoint of code users and of code enforcers.