@phdthesis{GostkowskaLekner2024,
  author    = {Gostkowska-Lekner, Natalia Katarzyna},
  title     = {Organic-inorganic hybrids based on P3HT and mesoporous silicon for thermoelectric applications},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-62047},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-620475},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {121},
  year      = {2024},
  abstract  = {This thesis presents a comprehensive study on synthesis, structure and thermoelectric transport properties of organic-inorganic hybrids based on P3HT and porous silicon. The effect of embedding polymer in silicon pores on the electrical and thermal transport is studied. Morphological studies confirm successful polymer infiltration and diffusion doping with roughly 50\% of the pore space occupied by conjugated polymer. Synchrotron diffraction experiments reveal no specific ordering of the polymer inside the pores. P3HT-pSi hybrids show improved electrical transport by five orders of magnitude compared to porous silicon and power factor values comparable or exceeding other P3HT-inorganic hybrids. The analysis suggests different transport mechanisms in both materials. In pSi, the transport mechanism relates to a Meyer-Neldel compansation rule. The analysis of hybrids' data using the power law in Kang-Snyder model suggests that a doped polymer mainly provides charge carriers to the pSi matrix, similar to the behavior of a doped semiconductor. Heavily suppressed thermal transport in porous silicon is treated with a modified Landauer/Lundstrom model and effective medium theories, which reveal that pSi agrees well with the Kirkpatrick model with a 68\% percolation threshold. Thermal conductivities of hybrids show an increase compared to the empty pSi but the overall thermoelectric figure of merit ZT of P3HT-pSi hybrid exceeds both pSi and P3HT as well as bulk Si.},
  language  = {en}
}
@book{Boehme2013,
  author    = {B{\"o}hme, Dimo},
  title     = {EU-Russia energy relations: What chance for solutions? : A focus on the natural gas sector},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-278-0},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-63022},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Public debate about energy relations between the EU and Russia is distorted. These distortions present considerable obstacles to the development of true partnership. At the core of the conflict is a struggle for resource rents between energy producing, energy consuming and transit countries. Supposed secondary aspects, however, are also of great importance. They comprise of geopolitics, market access, economic development and state sovereignty. The European Union, having engaged in energy market liberalisation, faces a widening gap between declining domestic resources and continuously growing energy demand. Diverse interests inside the EU prevent the definition of a coherent and respected energy policy. Russia, for its part, is no longer willing to subsidise its neighbouring economies by cheap energy exports. The Russian government engages in assertive policies pursuing Russian interests. In so far, it opts for a different globalisation approach, refusing the role of mere energy exporter. In view of the intensifying struggle for global resources, Russia, with its large energy potential, appears to be a very favourable option for European energy supplies, if not the best one. However, several outcomes of the strategic game between the two partners can be imagined. Engaging in non-cooperative strategies will in the end leave all stakeholders worse-off. The European Union should therefore concentrate on securing its partnership with Russia instead of damaging it. Stable cooperation would need the acceptance that the partner may pursue his own goals, which might be different from one's own interests. The question is, how can a sustainable compromise be found? This thesis finds that a mix of continued dialogue, a tit for tat approach bolstered by an international institutional framework and increased integration efforts appears as a preferable solution.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Boehme2011,
  author    = {B{\"o}hme, Dimo},
  title     = {EU-Russia energy relations: What chance for solutions? : A focus on the natural gas sector},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-120-2},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-50210},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {xix, 322},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {Public debate about energy relations between the EU and Russia is distorted. These distortions present considerable obstacles to the development of true partnership. At the core of the conflict is a struggle for resource rents between energy producing, energy consuming and transit countries. Supposed secondary aspects, however, are also of great importance. They comprise of geopolitics, market access, economic development and state sovereignty. The European Union, having engaged in energy market liberalisation, faces a widening gap between declining domestic resources and continuously growing energy demand. Diverse interests inside the EU prevent the definition of a coherent and respected energy policy. Russia, for its part, is no longer willing to subsidise its neighbouring economies by cheap energy exports. The Russian government engages in assertive policies pursuing Russian interests. In so far, it opts for a different globalisation approach, refusing the role of mere energy exporter. In view of the intensifying struggle for global resources, Russia, with its large energy potential, appears to be a very favourable option for European energy supplies, if not the best one. However, several outcomes of the strategic game between the two partners can be imagined. Engaging in non-cooperative strategies will in the end leave all stakeholders worse-off. The European Union should therefore concentrate on securing its partnership with Russia instead of damaging it. Stable cooperation would need the acceptance that the partner may pursue his own goals, which might be different from one's own interests. The question is, how can a sustainable compromise be found? This thesis finds that a mix of continued dialogue, a tit for tat approach bolstered by an international institutional framework and increased integration efforts appears as a preferable solution.},
  language  = {en}
}