What Passive House does and does not transfer
The method is sound. Some of the assumptions underneath it were formed in a climate that is not this one.
The Passive House method's real contribution is not a set of numbers. It is a discipline: reduce demand through fabric and form, verify with a consistent calculation, and do not let a system specification paper over a geometry problem. That discipline transfers anywhere.
The rigour travels. The default targets were calibrated somewhere colder.
What travels less well are the assumptions baked into a heating-dominated origin. Very high insulation levels and near-total airtightness are the right answer when the problem is keeping heat in through a long winter. Where the problem is keeping solar gain out, removing moisture, or exploiting night ventilation, the same measures range from marginal to counterproductive.
Latent load is the sharpest example. In warm humid conditions, dehumidification can dominate the cooling energy entirely, and a metric focused on sensible demand will rank options in the wrong order.
The productive position is to take the method and re-derive the targets from the climate at hand, rather than importing both. That is more work, and it is the work.