The Bourse de Commerce in the heart of Paris is itself a masterpiece of layering. Once a trading exchange in the 18th century, then a center of trade, it finally fell into a long slumber – until François Pinault gave the building a new role: that of art. In 2021, the Pinault Collection Museum opened its doors following a major intervention by Tadao Ando. Ando added a striking counterpoint to the historic building: a nine-metre-high concrete ring, as precise as an archaic instrument, with its typical formwork holes. It serves as a staircase, distributor and viewing platform – and as a stage for the interplay of art and architecture.
This ring was already an architectural sensation in 2021(see Baumeister 10/2021). Today, four years later, it sounds completely new. Because in the rotunda, under the glass dome from 1812, a work is currently unfolding that fills the building with sound, movement and reflections: “Clinamen” by Céleste Boursier-Mougenot.

In the middle of the hall, Boursier-Mougenot has placed an 18-metre shallow pool of water. Its blue color is reminiscent of a swimming pool, but the association is deceptive: this is not a place for bathing, but for listening and observing.
Dozens of white ceramic bowls float on the surface of the water, moved by a constant inflow. They gently bump into each other, rub against each other and separate again. A soft, bell-like ringing fills the room, sometimes as delicate as a barely audible rustling, sometimes surprisingly clear.
The installation uses the rotunda not only acoustically. It reflects the fine iron lattice of the dome construction and the changing sky in the water surface. Architecture, nature and art enter into a balance that seems both constructed and coincidental.

What is special about Boursier-Mougenot’s work is the absence of classical musical control. No instrumentalist, no composer intervenes. The bowls follow currents, eddies, the invisible dynamics of the water. Their sounds are the result of a choreography without sheet music – or rather a score consisting of physical conditions. The artist thus places himself in a tradition that understands sound itself as a living material, freed from the burden of musical convention. Here, music becomes an event that constantly renews itself, never repeats itself identically, always remains in flux.

The title refers to Epicurus’ natural philosophy. “Clinamen” refers to the minimal deviation, the unpredictable drifting of atoms in the cosmic stream. For Boursier-Mougenot, this is a metaphor for freedom: a poetic reference to the fact that every movement, every collision of the shells is unique. The work confronts visitors with a moment that hovers between duration and transience. Time seems suspended, stretched, suspended – a state of limbo in which listening becomes a contemplative experience.

It is remarkable how much the work takes up Ando’s architectural intervention and transforms it at the same time. The raw concrete ring, monumental and silent, is set into an acoustic resonance by the delicate sound in the water. The hardness of the material meets the fluidity of the element. The result is a dialog between opposites: geometric rigor and organic movement, architectural mass and ephemeral traces of sound, control and chance. The Bourse de Commerce itself thus becomes an instrument that is retuned, as it were, by the artist.

Boursier-Mougenot has been working at this interface between music, installation and everyday life for decades. Whether with birds that land on guitar strings or with objects that reveal unexpected sound qualities – it is always about the musical potential in the unspectacular. In “Clinamen”, simple bowls are transformed into bodies of sound through context and movement. It is this poetic transformation that characterizes his art: the ordinary becomes singular, the everyday aesthetically elevated.

Céleste Boursier-Mougenot, born in Nice in 1961, started out as a musician. He worked as a composer in the theater for a long time before dissolving the boundaries between music and visual art. Today, he is considered one of the most internationally renowned sound artists. He represented France at the 2015 Venice Biennale and has exhibited in São Paulo, Melbourne, London, San Francisco and Istanbul. In his installations, he shows that music is not limited to the stage, but can be created anywhere – in space, by chance, in the interplay of material and perception.The “Clinamen” installation is more than just an artistic intervention. It is a reinterpretation of the Bourse de Commerce – as a resonance space, as a mirror of transience, as a stage for the moment. By focusing on chance, movement and sound, it reminds us that architecture is never static. It lives in use, in perception, in encounters. The real poetry lies in this tension between Ando’s eternal stone and Boursier-Mougenot’s fleeting shells: architecture and art as a shared reflection on time.

The installation “Clinamen” by Céleste Boursier-Mougenot can be seen in the rotunda of the Bourse de Commerce – Pinault Collection in Paris until September 21, 2025.

Rethinking the passive house: anyone who thinks they have long understood the subject is very much mistaken. The days of dogmatic U-value fetishists are over, because the new passive house concepts are not only driving construction forward in terms of energy, but also digitally, socially and in terms of climate policy. And they do so with a matter-of-factness that makes even the skeptics in the industry wonder.

• The passive house is not a closed standard, but a dynamic concept – and is on the verge of its next evolutionary stage.
• Germany, Austria and Switzerland are still pioneers, but the pressure to innovate is increasing – digitalization and new materials are turning the scene upside down.
• Digital tools and AI are fundamentally changing planning, monitoring and operation: from simulations to networked building stock.
• Sustainability is more than just energy consumption – life cycle, circular economy and social aspects are coming to the fore.
• Technical expertise is shifting: energy efficiency and building physics are no longer enough, data expertise and system understanding are becoming mandatory.
• The passive house is becoming a political plaything – funding policy, EU taxonomy and social expectations demand new answers.
• Architecture is faced with a question of meaning: do we serve technology, or does technology serve architecture?
• Criticism and visions collide: from the dogmatism of the passive house standard to radical openness to new concepts.
• In a global context, the passive house provides impetus, but is also under pressure to justify itself.

Passive House 2.0: Between myth, standard and system innovation

The passive house was once the shining icon of sustainable building. Now it’s an old hand – or is it? Anyone who thinks so has missed out on change. The classic cornerstones – minimizing the heating requirement, highly insulated envelope, controlled ventilation – have long been mainstream, at least on paper. But practice shows that passive houses are far more than just an energy label. In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, the concept is being reinterpreted and further developed, driven by stricter climate targets, scarce resources and an increasingly digitalized everyday planning process. The days of “copy and paste” details are over. Today, the passive house is becoming a system – and the system is becoming a field for experimentation.

Large cities are focusing on passive house districts, no longer just on individual lighthouse projects. Vienna, for example, has realized entire districts in passive house quality, while Frankfurt and Zurich are massively raising the standards for municipal buildings. But the pressure to innovate is not just coming from the top. Private developers, housing companies and cooperatives are driving forward hybrid models that combine energy optimization with digitalization, comfort and social sustainability. What was considered uncompromising and expensive ten years ago is now part of a new understanding of building culture – and part of a market that is increasingly self-regulating.

At the same time, the old dogmas are beginning to falter. The discussion is no longer just about the last tenth of a U-value, but about flexibility, life cycle and circular economy. The passive house must open up – to new materials, modular construction methods, digital monitoring systems and participatory planning processes. That doesn’t make things easier, but it does make them more exciting. Anyone planning a passive house today is faced with the task of managing a complex ecosystem – consisting of technology, data, social needs and political framework conditions.

Criticism of the passive house ideology has by no means died down. Some see the standard as a technocratic straitjacket, others criticize the lack of creative freedom or the neglect of grey energy and user behaviour. But it is precisely this friction that gives rise to innovation. The new passive house concepts are not recipes for “one size fits all”, but platforms for tailor-made solutions. And the architects? They are becoming process architects who mediate between technology, society and politics.

Internationally, the passive house remains an export hit – and yet a special path. While North America, China and Scandinavia are developing their own low-energy standards, the German-speaking model remains a frame of reference that must constantly justify itself and develop further. The next generation of passive houses will no longer be measured by their heating requirements, but by their ability to integrate complex sustainability goals – from the choice of materials to neighborhood development. The industry is ready for this leap. The only question is: who will jump first?

Digitalization and AI: the passive house is becoming a networked system

Anyone who thinks that digitalization in the passive house only means a bit of smart home has underestimated the extent of the transformation. The new passive house concepts rely on data-based planning, simulation and operation – with a level of precision that was unthinkable just a few years ago. In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, digital twins of buildings, neighborhoods and even entire districts are being created that not only map energy flows, but also user behavior and environmental influences in real time. Planners are becoming data managers who run simulations for every construction phase – from the first draft sketch to operation after five years.

The role of AI should not be underestimated. Self-learning algorithms not only optimize the system technology, but also forecast maintenance cycles, user requirements and energy needs. The passive house of the future communicates with other buildings, reacts to price signals in the electricity grid, adapts its operating modes to weather forecasts – and learns with every heating period. The result: less oversizing, more efficiency, more comfort. But digital progress also has its downsides. Data protection, system integration and the risk of black boxes are driving the debate. Who still understands what AI is doing in the background? And who is responsible if algorithms suddenly send entire neighborhoods into hibernation?

Networking does not end at the building façade. In Zurich, for example, passive house developments are being integrated into urban energy management systems, while the city of Vienna is developing platforms for monitoring energy consumption in real time. In Germany, the first pilot projects are being developed in which passive houses are becoming part of “smart grids” – including bidirectional data exchange with suppliers, residents and municipal utilities. The potential is enormous: load management, self-consumption optimization, integration of renewable energies. But the effort involved is increasing. Planners have to deal with interfaces, databases and IT security – a paradigm shift that overwhelms some and inspires others.

Training is lagging behind. While universities are still teaching U-values and ventilation concepts like a textbook, data skills, systems thinking and digital collaboration have long been in demand in practice. The new passive house professionals are generalists with specialist knowledge – and they are rare. The shortage of skilled workers is worsening and the industry is desperately looking for young talent who can do both: Building physics and bits.

The leap into the digital passive house future is irreversible. Anyone still planning in analogue today risks not only frictional losses, but also being left behind by a system that is constantly optimizing itself. The question is not whether the passive house will become digital – but how quickly and how radically the industry is prepared to rethink. The champions are no longer just sitting at the drawing board and computer, but also at the interfaces between planning, operation and IT.

Sustainability redefined: Life cycle, cycle and social dimension

For years, the classic passive house discussion revolved around heating requirements. Today, this is no longer enough. Climate policy, scarcity of resources and social expectations demand a new sustainability – and passive house concepts have to deliver. In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, there is growing pressure to integrate the entire life cycle analysis into planning. This means that every step, from the extraction of raw materials to production, use, conversion and dismantling, must be checked for its ecological balance. The focus is shifting from operating energy to gray energy – and the passive house is becoming a laboratory for circular construction.

The circular economy is the new magic word. Innovative projects rely on reusable components, modular constructions and reversible connections. In Vienna, passive house schools are being built whose walls and ceilings can be dismantled after 20 years and reused elsewhere. In Zurich, residential complexes are being built whose building materials are recorded in the digital material passport and documented for future dismantling. This is not a gimmick, but the answer to resource scarcity and carbon footprints that go far beyond operation.

The social dimension is coming more to the fore. For a long time, passive houses were a topic for committed builders and showcase projects. Today, the focus is on affordable housing, user comfort and healthy interiors. In Germany, cooperatives are experimenting with participatory planning processes, while in Austria, passive house districts are being created that focus on social mixing and neighborhood networks. Some of the buildings are being co-developed by the residents, and digital tools enable continuous feedback on comfort, indoor climate and communal use.

But the demand is growing. Sustainability in passive houses no longer just means “less energy”, but “better living” – and this is measurable, verifiable and permanent. The certification systems are responding to this. New standards integrate CO₂ balances, life cycle analyses, social indicators and even aspects of biodiversity. The passive house is becoming a building block of sustainable urban development, embedded in mobility concepts, open space planning and local energy generation.

The challenges are enormous. Anyone planning a passive house today must not only have technical expertise, but also social and ecological skills. The profession is shifting: from building physicist to system integrator, from detailer to process designer. The pressure comes not only from politicians or certifiers, but also from a public that demands sustainability – and is prepared to break new ground if it is understandable and convincing.

Architects in transition: between technical dogma and creative freedom

The new generation of passive houses poses a question of meaning for architecture. For a long time, technology dominated, design followed – and the U-value ruled. Today, this dogma is crumbling. The most advanced passive house projects are being created where technology and architecture meet at eye level. In Switzerland, for example, architects are focusing on expressive forms, innovative materials and bold spatial concepts – without losing sight of the energy requirements. In Germany, planners are experimenting with adaptive façades, multifunctional components and hybrid load-bearing structures that offer both energy and design qualities.

The debate about the “beautiful passive house” is in full swing. Critics accuse the standard of being too uniform, too technical and too boring. Supporters counter with reference projects that prove it: Energy efficiency and good architecture are not mutually exclusive – on the contrary, they inspire each other. The best projects are created where the design is not dictated by technology, but where technology and design are understood as a unit. This requires courage, a willingness to experiment and a deep understanding of processes, materials and users.

The role of architects is changing fundamentally. They are no longer just designers, but moderators of complex processes, mediators between technology, politics, business and society. The tools are changing, the responsibility is growing. Anyone working in the passive house context must not only master building physics and design theory, but also data management, system integration and stakeholder communication. The classic separation of design and construction is dissolving – the passive house is becoming an ongoing project that takes a holistic approach to planning, construction and operation.

Visionary voices are calling for the passive house standard to be opened up to new technologies, materials and processes. The EU taxonomy, funding policy and social expectations are driving the profession forward. Those who rely on the old rules will be left behind. But there are also counter-movements: Architects who consciously rely on low-tech concepts, local materials and handcrafted solutions – and show that sustainability does not necessarily have to mean high-tech.

In the global discourse, the passive house remains a driving force, but not a dogma. The most exciting developments arise where local conditions, social needs and technological innovations come together. The architects of tomorrow will no longer be mere administrators of technology, but process designers who use the passive house as a platform for sustainable, creative and resilient architecture.

Conclusion: Rethinking the passive house is more than just a standard – it is a paradigm shift

The passive house of the future is not a rigid set of rules, but a dynamic system that is constantly evolving. Digitalization, new materials, social demands and ecological challenges are challenging the profession – and opening up unimagined possibilities. The architects, planners and clients who take the plunge will become part of a movement that not only makes building more efficient, but also more intelligent, social and creative. Those who continue to see the passive house as merely an energy standard are missing the opportunity to rethink – and redesign – architecture. The future belongs to those who ask questions, experiment and see the passive house as a laboratory for the building of tomorrow. Everything else is yesterday.