Abstract:  When China joined the Paris Agreement, it proposed to strive to achieve carbon peaking in 2030 and carbon neutrality in
2060. Under the background of dual-carbon, some scholars proposed to implement compulsory licensing of clean energy technology by comparing compulsory licensing of medicines. However, the existing theory has a logic of argumentation fallacy, a lack of dimension and many other problems. Through the external justification of legal philosophy based on environmental rights, the internal justification of jurisprudence based on legal norms, the empirical analysis based on the implementation of clean energy patents, and the comparative analysis based on clean energy patents and pharmaceutical patents. It is concluded that clean energy compulsory licensing has legally justified, but not practically necessary. Even so, the compulsory licensing system should be improved to play an assistant role in technology transfer negotiations, promote the transfer of clean energy technology, and guarantee the long-term goals of carbon peaking and carbon neutrality.

Key words: carbon peaking and carbon neutrality, clean energy technologies, compulsory license, technology transfer, addressing
climate change