View Article Online

View Journal

RSC Advances
This article can be cited before page numbers have been issued, to do this please use: A. Dey, S. Panja,
A. Sikder and S. Chattopadhyay, RSC Adv., 2014, DOI: 10.1039/C4RA14655G.

This is an Accepted Manuscript, which has been through the

Royal Society of Chemistry peer review process and has been
accepted for publication.

Accepted Manuscripts are published online shortly after

acceptance, before technical editing, formatting and proof reading.
Using this free service, authors can make their results available
to the community, in citable form, before we publish the edited
article. This Accepted Manuscript will be replaced by the edited,
formatted and paginated article as soon as this is available.

You can find more information about Accepted Manuscripts in the

Information for Authors.

Please note that technical editing may introduce minor changes

to the text and/or graphics, which may alter content. The journal’s
standard Terms & Conditions and the Ethical guidelines still
apply. In no event shall the Royal Society of Chemistry be held
responsible for any errors or omissions in this Accepted Manuscript
or any consequences arising from the use of any information it
contains.

www.rsc.org/advances
 Page 1 of 7 RSC Advances
RSC Advances Dynamic Article Links ►
View Article Online
DOI: 10.1039/C4RA14655G

Cite this: DOI: 10.1039/c0xx00000x

www.rsc.org/xxxxxx COMMUNICATION
Published on 09 December 2014. Downloaded by University of California - San Francisco on 16/12/2014 02:41:10.

One Pot Green Synthesis of Graphene-Iron Oxide Nanocomposite

(GINC): An Efficient Material for Enhancement of Thermoelectric
Performance
Abhijit Dey,a* Sudipta Panja b, Arun Kanti Sikder, a* Santanu Chattopadhyayb**

RSC Advances Accepted Manuscript

5 Received (in XXX, XXX) Xth XXXXXXXXX 20XX, Accepted Xth XXXXXXXXX 20XX
DOI: 10.1039/b000000x
We report for the first time, a green method for graphene- Pr doping, copper telluride, Bi2Te3 nanowires, magnesium
iron oxide nanocomposite (GINC) synthesis by dispersing 50 silicide, n-type SiGe bulk alloys, CuxS and β-Zn4Sb3 [9-17]
graphene and nano iron oxide (Fe2O3) in ethanol via showed improved thermoelectric performance. Among these
10 ultrasonication followed by micro-wave irradiation. This is a material, Bi2Te3 is found to be the best room temperature
simple method of making a broader range of graphene-metal thermoelectric materials [18-21]. However, organic materials like
oxide nanocomposites with excellent dispersion of 3D conjugated polymers are becoming more potential candidates due
nanoparticles over 2D graphene. In addition, we have also 55 to their enhance thermoelectric power factor and figure of merit
demonstrated the synthesis of highly conductive PVAc-GINC [22-25]. In addition, their low thermal conductivity (k= 0.1–0.5
15 and PVAc-graphene composites by ultrasonication followed W m-1 K-1), [26,27], easy processibility, flexibility, non toxicity,
by hot compaction for thermoelectric application. Graphene stability and cheaper cost in comparison to chalcogenides make
and GINC concentration were judiciously varied and them more beneficial. In addition, several other advantages like
optimized for the sake of high electrical conductivity and 60 mechanical robustness for better durability, application as a
Seebeck coefficient. The fabricated PVAc-GINC film thermoelectric paint over armor vehicle for stealth application
20 exhibited a conductivity of 2.18 × 104 S/m with a Seebeck and cloths based on flexible thermoelectric materials based fabric
coefficient of 38.8 µV/K. Hence, the power factor (PF) reaches for energy harvesting from body heat. These applications are very
to 32.90 µW m-1K-2 which is 27 fold higher than the difficult to achieve in case of chalcogenide based material.
thermoelectric material based on PVAc- graphene composite. 65 In polymer composite, higher power factor, i.e. S2σ, can
This PF value is found to be maximized, ever reported be achieved by two mechanisms: doping the polymer [28-30] or
25 without using conducting polymer. blending with different conducting nano fillers[31-33] like CNT
Graphene was discovered by Geim and Novoselov [1] in [34-35] and graphenes [36-39]. Studies on the thermoelectric
2004 and awarded with the noble prize in the year 2010 in properties of these composites are found them to be competitive
physics. Since then a number of researchers have been trying to 70 with respect to chalcogenides, however, their efficiency is still
extract effective properties out of it. It has the potential to attract lower [28, 31, 32]. Among several polymers,(3,4-
30 widespread attention due to its unique properties like high carrier ethylenedioxythiophene): poly (styrenesulfonate) (PEDOT:PSS),
mobility [2], room temperature quantum effect and ambipolar [23, 40] poly (3-hexylthiophene) (P3HT), [41] and polyaniline
electric field effect. These unique properties of graphene reduced (PANI)[38, 42-44] are regularly used due to their intrinsic high
effectively by increasing the number of graphene layers until 75 electrical conductivity. The electrical properties of the polymer
reaches to 3D form [3, 4] i.e. Graphite. It is a bulk form of can easily be enhanced without affecting the thermal conductivity
35 graphene with multilayer structure. Graphene with 10 or less and mechanical flexibility [45]. This reason of enhancement in
graphitic layer exhibit distinct properties compared to the bulk electrical conductivity is usually explained by percolation law.
form [5].These dictinct properties make graphene, one of the This law predicts a drastic increase in electrical conductivity after
interesting material for composite, electronic and advance 80 reaching to a percolation threshold [46, 47].
mechanical resonator [6,7]. Here, we demonstrated the simple preparation method of
40 Thermoelectricity is an upcoming field which deals with smart GINC. Fe3O4 based GINC has been reported to be prepared
materials to convert heat into electricity. Recently, thermoelectric following the solvothermal reaction [48]. However, novelty of
materials have gained tremendous research interests as clean and our methodology is its simplicity, economic nature and eco-
green energy source that helps in energy harvesting from waste 85 friendliness. The required raw chemical grades and
heat. The efficiency of thermoelectric materials is expressed as instrumentation are described elaborately in supporting
45 ZT= S2σT/к, where ‘S’ denoted by thermopower i.e. Seebeck information (†See S-1 in the ESI). The structure, composition
coefficient, σ is denoted by electrical conductivity, к is thermal and morphology of the samples have been characterized by the
conductivity and T is absolute temperature [8]. Nowadays, some Raman spectra, Raman mapping, Fourier transform infrared
inorganic materials like Ag-doped Cu2Se and Cu2Te, SrTiO3 by 90 spectroscopy (FTIR), environmental scanning electron

This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry [year] [journal], [year], [vol], 00–00 | 1
 RSC Advances Page 2 of 7
View Article Online
DOI: 10.1039/C4RA14655G

microscope (ESEM), high resolution transmission electron

microscopy (HRTEM), powdered X ray diffraction (XRD) and
BET experiment.
In addition, an in depth study of thermoelectric
5 properties (electrical conductivity, Seebeck coefficient and power
factor) of PVAc polymer with different fillers like GINC,
graphene have been evaluated and presented. In spite of high
Published on 09 December 2014. Downloaded by University of California - San Francisco on 16/12/2014 02:41:10.

thermal conductivity, these materials could be engineered in a

simple way to enhance thermoelectric properties of synthesized
10 polymer nanocomposite. PVAc was selected because of its good
adhesive nature and binding capability with lower thermal
55
conductivity. These properties help to increase the filler loading

RSC Advances Accepted Manuscript

and efficiency of thermoelectric material. Graphene used as a
substrate which helps to increase the electrical conductivity
15 drastically. A few oxides such as iron oxide [49], nickel oxide,
cadmium oxide and doped zirconium oxide exhibit impressive TE
properties for various application. There are many known stable
iron oxide stoichiometries available. Amongst them, Fe2O3 is the
compound that has been studied for its TE property. An analysis
20 of a limited number of reports suggests that Fe2O3 can be a
promising TMO for TE application at high temperatures as it
exhibits high TPFs at room as well as elevated temperatures.
Fe2O3 thin films have been shown to exhibit peak S i.e Seebeck
coefficient of 1650 µV/K in the temperature range of 270-290 K.
25 A peak σ i.e. electrical conductivity of 5.5×103 S/m has been
reported in the same temperature range, resulting to a large TPF
of 1.5×104 µW/m.K2. In GINC, nano Fe2O3 was decorated over
the graphene sheet during exfoliation. After nano Fe2O3
decoration, the staking nature of graphene sheet reduced
30 drastically. Hence reduce the tendency of graphene to graphite
transformation process.
2. Experimental
During nanocomposie preparation, nano iron oxide
and nano graphene were prepared separately. Nano iron oxide
35 was prepared from iron nitrate i.e Fe (NO3)3 in two step process.
Firstly, preparation of citrate polymeric gel followed by
calcination of gel († see also S-2 in the ESI). The graphene was
prepared in three steps as reported in the literature [49]. In the
first step, graphite oxide was prepared from graphitic flakes by
40 Hummers method. In the second step, thermally expanded
graphene oxide (TEGO) was prepared by thermal
expansion/exfoliation at 1050 °C (Ar, 30s). Finally, graphene
nanosheet (GNS) was obtained by hydrogen reduction of TEGO
at 400 °C for 2 hours.
45 For making GINC, 50 mg graphene was first dispersed in
absolute ethanol by ultrasonication for 40 min. After
ultrasonication, nano iron oxide was added into the graphene
Scheme 1: Schematic representation of synthesis and application
of graphene-iron oxide nanocomposite (GINC)
Results and Discussion
3.1 Characterization of GINC
60 Fig. S-3 (see ESI) represents the color variation between
graphene (black), nano iron oxide (red) and GINC (coffee color.
Environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM) images
and FESEM images (see Fig. 1) depict continuous dispersion of
iron oxide nano particle over graphene nano sheet. Uniform
65 decoration of nano iron oxide was observed over the graphene
sheet.
Fig.1: I and II, ESEM images and III, FESEM images of
graphene and graphene iron oxide nanocomposite (GINC) (†See
70 also S-4 in the ESI).
High resolution transmission electron microscope
(HRTEM) and SAED pattern were captured to inspect the quality
of nano iron oxide decoration in the graphene layers. Fig. 2
shows, HRTEM micrographs with SAED pattern of graphene,
75 nano iron oxide and GINC. The results confirm the size of iron
oxide and graphene are in the nano scales. Graphene sheets are
clearly visible. Both nano iron oxide and graphene were found to
be crystalline in nature as confirmed by SAED pattern. According
to Fig.2c, iron oxides nano particles were placed over the
80 graphene sheet forming the nano composite. It shows nicely
arranged lattice fringes as demonstrated in the HRTEM images.
GINC was also found to be crystalline in nature.
nano iron
oxide
85

dispersion with ultrasonication continued for 120 min. After

ultrasonication, the dispersed composite solution was kept as
50 ambient condition for drying. After evaporation of ethanol,
nanocomposite was deposited on the petri dish. The deposited
nanocomposite placed into the microwave reactor for 2 min for 90

better exfoliation. After cooling, the GINC was collected in to the

sample vial (Scheme 1).

95 Fig.2: HR-TEM image (I, II) and SAED pattern (III) of (a) nano

2 | Journal Name, [year], [vol], 00–00 This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry [year]
 Page 3 of 7 RSC Advances
iron oxide, (b) graphene, (c) graphene-iron oxide nanocomposite
(GINC). (†See also S-4 in the ESI).
Fig.3 shows FTIR traces of graphene, iron oxide and
GINC. GINC spectra reveal the presence Fe2O3 signature with
5 low defect content in graphene. Raman Spectroscopy was used to
examine the quality of graphene sheet before and after
nanocomposite formation by above mentioned techniques. The
Published on 09 December 2014. Downloaded by University of California - San Francisco on 16/12/2014 02:41:10.
most pronounced Raman traces are D band at 1310 cm-1
corresponds to defect and G band 1575 cm-1 corresponds to in
10 plane vibration of sp2 carbon. 2D band at 2627.4 cm-1 which is
(a)
(c)
25 Fig. 3: (a) FTIR and (b) Raman spectra of graphene, nano iron oxide, GINC (c) Raman mapping of GINC (†see also S-5 in the ESI)
Fig. 4, depicts the typical XRD scans of GINC, nano iron oxide
and graphene. All the peaks are assigned to respective
crystallographic phases. X-ray diffractogram of GINC (Fig. 4)
30 reveals characteristics peaks corresponding to graphene as well as
nano those owing to Fe2O3. It is revealed that during processing,
the crystallographic planes of graphene and iron oxide remain
40
Fig.4: XRD profiles of nano iron oxide, graphene and GINC
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry [year]
View Article Online
DOI: 10.1039/C4RA14655G
generated due to a two phonon double resonance process has also
been observed. The lower intensity D band indicates the presence
of a small amount of defects on graphene flakes. Coleman and
coworker suggested [42] that the defects mainly present at the
15 edges of the flakes while the basal plane was found to be free of
defects. The I(D)/I(G) of the graphene-iron oxide composite
increased by 2 times (0.993) with respect to pure graphene
(0.497). Several defects with sp2 domain were formed during
nanocomposite preparation.. Fig. 3 (b) shows characteristic
20 Raman signatures. The decoration of nano iron oxide over
graphene substrate is confirmed by Raman mapping (See Fig.3c).
RSC Advances Accepted Manuscript
(b)
Fe2O3 Graphene
traces traces
intact. According to the Scherrer equation, the calculated
crystallite size of GNS and nano Fe2O3 were 28 nm and 38nm,
35 respectively. From BET analysis (†see S-6 in the ESI) the size of
GINC was found to be 43nm.
45
Journal Name, [year], [vol], 00–00 | 3
 RSC Advances Page 4 of 7
View Article Online
DOI: 10.1039/C4RA14655G

3.2. Thermoelectric Application of GINC
Thermoelectric properties mainly consist of three parameters, i.e.
Seebeck coefficient or thermopower, electrical conductivity and .
These properties were measured and calculate the power
5 factor(PF). For measurement of above mentioned properties,
synthesis of thermoelectric polymer nanocomposite and its
properties measurement procedure are as follows:
Published on 09 December 2014. Downloaded by University of California - San Francisco on 16/12/2014 02:41:10.
From Fig. 5a, it can be realized that the electrical
conductivity of PVAc- GINC composite increased up to 4-5 order
compared to PVAc graphene composite. Raw PVAc is having an
electrical conductivity of 10-13 S/m. The electrical conductivity
60 was measured at ambient conditions. After two months, they
showed identical results. This indicates good stability of the
nanocomposite with a period of time. The Seebeck coefficient

Synthesis of thermoelectric polymer nanocomposite
Polymer nanocomposites were prepared through very simple
10 method. Both fillers (i.e. graphene, nano iron oxide and GINC)
and PVAc water emulsion were dispersed ultrasonically for 30
min at 35 kHz. After ultrsonication, mechanical stirring
(see Fig. 5b) also exhibit increasing trend and reaches to a
maximum with 80 wt. % filler concentration, then decreases. Fig.
65 5c exhibits, the variation of power factor (PF) as a function of
filler concentration. According to Fig. 7c, PF increases and
reaches to a very high value, 32 µW m-1K-2 at 80 wt.% filler

RSC Advances Accepted Manuscript

continued for 4 hours at 250 rpm. After getting proper dispersion, concentration. This value is found to be highest ever reported
casting was carried out in an aluminum tray. Complete drying in the literature for PVAc based system without containing
15 was performed by placing the sample in a vacuum oven at 105 ˚C 70 conducting polymer. The improvement of electrical conductivity
for 4 hrs. Now, the dried sample subjected to hot pressing at 120 was following the percolation law of the composite which
˚C with 5 min preheating time and 3 min compression (Pressure predicts an enhancement of electrical conductivity upto a critical
10 T approx). By following above mentioned methodology, concentration level of filler. These phenomena come into play,
polymer nanocomposite sheets were prepared and subjected to
when two dissimilar materials with a large difference in electrical
20 the measurement of thermoelectric properties.
75 conductivity are mixed.
Thermoelectric Power/ Seebeck coefficient (S) Measurements.
To measure the thermopower as a function of
temperature, a 30mm × 6 mm × 1 mm pieces [50] of the polymer
nanocomposite film was cut and placed on a thermal insulating
25 fiberglass. A Peltier heater was positioned at one end of the
sample with a thermally conductive epoxy (electrically insulating
2763 Stycast), while the other end, a piece of copper (drainage of
heat) made a contact with the Peltier cooling module. The
temperature gradient and voltage drop along the film was
30 measured with thermocouples arranged in series (electrically
insulated from the sample with 2763 Stycast) with two copper
wires. To be sure that the thermal gradient and the voltage drop
were being measured at the same place, two small Cu films were
attached to the PVAc-GINC film with thermally/electrically
35 conducting silver epoxy (Dupont 4929N). The thermocouple and
the voltage wires were attached to these Cu films. The
thermoelectric voltages were monitored with respect to
temperature difference by Keithley 2182A nanovoltmeter. The
base temperature was changed with Peltier cooling module. The
40 thermoelectric power was determined by two independent means:
after reaching a steady state through an applied current to the
heater and by fitting the linear V vs ∆T response to a heating
pulse. The deviation between both methods and between different
experimentation was always lower than 5%.
45 Electrical Resistivity Measurements. Due to the high electrical
conductive nature of the composite, electrical resistivity was
measured by using delta mode four probe method. The smallest
possible current was sourced (100mA) by Keithley 6220 and
voltage was monitored with a Keithley 2182A nanovoltmeter.
50 The smallest possible current was used in order to avoid heating
of the sample at low temperature. To measure electrical
conductivity, polymer nanocomposite sample with a dimension of
8mm × 3mm × 1mm have been prepared and subjected to the test.
The detail procedure for electrical resistivity measurement was
55 given in †S-7 in ESI.

4 | Journal Name, [year], [vol], 00–00 This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry [year]
 Page 5 of 7 RSC Advances
View Article Online
DOI: 10.1039/C4RA14655G

Fig. 5: (a) Electrical conductivity (b) Seebeck coefficient (c)

power factor as a function of graphene concentration at room
temperature (300K). The arrow indicates the enhancement of all
5 the three properties, i.e. electrical conductivity, Seebeck
coefficient and power factor at a concentration level of 80-90 wt.
%.
Published on 09 December 2014. Downloaded by University of California - San Francisco on 16/12/2014 02:41:10.

During the study of thermoelectric properties, PVAc-

GINC composite showed 10 fold increases in electrical
10 conductivity and two times increase in Seebeck coefficient was
observed compared to the PVAc-graphene composite with equal
filler loading (80 wt%). Hence, the calculated power factor for
PVAc-GINC composite (density: 1.47 g/cc) increases up to 27

RSC Advances Accepted Manuscript

times compare to PVAc-graphene composite (density: 1.32 g/cc).
15 For PVAc-GINC composite, thermal conductivity is found to be
3.21 W/mK. Hence, ZT approaches to 0.0031. This is one of the
30 Fig. 6: Schematic diagram to explain enhancement of electrical
noble findings. In GINC, nano iron oxides were decorated over
2D graphene sheet. Presence of nano iron oxide particle helps to conductivity and Seebeck coefficient simultaneously. ( )
destroy thermally conductive network but electrical network represent electrical conduction and ( ) thermal conduction
20 remain intact [52] .When GINC is employed as conducting filler,
which not only decouples σ and S, but also enhances both the To justify the novelty of the present work, a comparative
parameter simultaneously. However, the enhancement of Seebeck summary of the latest results based on PVAc matrix (see Table 1)
coefficient is marginal with respect to electrical conductivity in 35 and other composites of inorganic and organic materials have
case of PVAc-GINC composite. We are reporting this feature for been highlighted in S-8 and S-9 in ESI.
25 the 1st time for GINC. The thermal insulating nature of the PVAC
assists to reduce the thermal conductivity of the matrix which is
very important in thermoelectric field.

Table 1: Summary of thermoelectric properties of various PVAc based carbon material composites.

Sample σ, S/m S, µV/k κ, W/mK Calculated

PF (S2σ) µW m-1K-2
PVAc +CNT (20%) [Ref. 52] 4800 (300K) 40-50 (300K) 0.18-0.34 at PF= 7.8-12
300K
PVAc+SWCNT (40%) [Ref. 53] 900 40 0.25 PF= 1.44

PVAc+SWCNT (3 wt. %) + GA 22-49 39-42 0.22-0.25 PF=0.033

[Ref: 54]
PVAc+Au+ CNT [Ref. 55] 105 --- Unaffected Unaffected

PVAc+ DOC + MWCNT (7-12%) 32-63 5-10 0.13-0.17 PF= 0.34-0.50

PVAc+ TCPP+ MWCNT (7-12%) 10-100 22-26 0.14 PF= 0.079-0.34
PVAc+ DOC + DWCNT (7-12%) -- 50-70 0.15 PF=0.045- 0.096
PVAc+ TCPP + DWCNT (7-12%) -- 70-82 0.155-0.16 PF= 0-0.204
[Ref. 56]
PVAc+ polyethyleneimine (10 wt. %) +CNT 420-1250 -66- -75 -- PF= 1.89- 7.03
with 99% purity (20 wt. %)
+ SDBS (20-60 wt. %),
PVAc+ CNT with 99% purity (20 wt.%)+ 320-430 -65- -80 -- PF= 1.35- 2.752
SDBS(20 wt. %) + PEI (0-40 wt. %),
PVAc+ CNT with 99% purity (20 wt. %) +
SDBS (40 wt. %)+ PEI (0-40 wt%), 440-920 -110 - 110 -- PF= 5.32- 11.13
Composition IX
[Ref. 57]
PVAc+ Au deposited CNT (0-20 wt. %) 6×105 2.5 -- PF= 3.75
+PEDOT: PSS (15% vol. Replacement by Au)
[Ref. 55]
PEDOT:PSS+ PVAc + CNT(35-75%) [ Ref. 50] 5×104 19-34 0.2-0.4 PF=30-110
- 1.35×105

This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry [year] Journal Name, [year], [vol], 00–00 | 5
 RSC Advances
Present work
PVAc + GINC (80 wt. %) 2.18×104 38.8
PVAc + Graphene (95%) 2.89×103 20.7
Published on 09 December 2014. Downloaded by University of California - San Francisco on 16/12/2014 02:41:10.
3. Conclusions
In summary, a novel, economical and green route has been
developed by using ultrasonication and microwave irradiation.
5 Other metal oxide-graphene composites can also be processed
easily by following the above mentioned method. Large scale
25
production can be achieved by using this simple method. In
addition, we have also demonstrated the synthesis of highly
conductive PVAc-GINC and PVAc-graphene composites by
10 ultrasonication followed by hot compaction for thermoelectric
application. Graphene and GINC concentration were judiciously 30
varied and optimized for the sake of high electrical conductivity
and Seebeck coefficient. The fabricated PVAc-GINC film
exhibited a conductivity of 2.18 × 104 S/m with a Seebeck
15 coefficient of 38.8 µV/K. Hence, the power factor (PF) reaches to 35
32.90 µW m-1K-2 which is 27 fold higher than the thermoelectric
material based on PVAc- graphene composite. This PF value is
found to be maximized, ever reported without using conducting
polymer. We also expect superior thermoelectric properties by
20 incorporation of conducting polymer and ionic liquid. 40
1. K.. S Novoselov, A. K.Geim, S. V Morozov, D. Jiang, Y. S
45 Zhang, V. Dubonos, I. V. Grigorieva and A. A. Firsov,
Science, 2004, 306, 666. 80
2. K. S. .Novoselov and A.K. Geim, Nat. Mater. 2007, 6, 183.
3. W. Zhang, W. He and X.Jing. J.Phys. Chem. B, 2010,114, 10368
4. K.S.Novoselov, D. Jiang, F.Schedin, T.J.Booth, V.V. Khotkevich,
50 S.V. Morozov and A.K.Geim, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.2005, 102, 10451.
5. B.Partoens and F.M Peeters, Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter 85
Mater. Phys., 2006, 74, 075404
6. A.Schlierf, P.Samorì and V.Palermo, J. Mater. Chem. C 2014, 2,
3129.
55 7. A.K.Geim, Science 2009, 324, 1530.
8. L.D. Zhao, S.H. Lo, Y. Zhang, H.Sun, G. Tan, C. Uher, 90
C.Wolverton, P.V. Dravid and M. G. Kanatzidis, Nature 2014,
508, 373.
9. S. Ballikaya, H. Chi, R. James Salvador and Ctirad
60 Uher, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2013, 1, 12478.
10. M. U. Kahaly and U. Schwingenschlögl, J. Mater. 95
Chem. A, 2014, 2, 10379.
11. C. Nethravathi, C. R. Rajamathi, M. Rajamathi,
R. Maki, T. Mori, D. Golberg and Y. Bando , J. Mater.
65 Chem. A, 2014, 2, 985
12. H. Y. Lv, H. J. Liu, J. Shi, X. F. Tang and C. Uher
J. Mater. Chem. A, 2013,1, 6831. 100
13. S. K. Bux, M. T. Yeung, E. S. Toberer, G. J.Snyder, R. B.
Kaner and J.P. Fleurial . J. Mater. Chem., 2011,21, 12259.
70 14. R. Basu, S. Bhattacharya, R. Bhatt, M. Roy, S. Ahmad, A.
Singh, M. Navaneethan, Y. Hayakawa, D. K. Aswal and S. K.
Gupta , J. Mater. Chem. A, 2014,2, 6922. 105
15. Q. Jiang, H. Yan, J. Khaliq, Y.Shen, K. Simpson and M. J.
Reece , J. Mater. Chem. A, 2014, 2, 9486.
75 16. L. Hu, H. Gao, X. Liu, H. Xie, J. Shen, T. Zhu and Xinbing
Zhao. J. Mater. Chem., 2012,22, 16484.
17. E. S. Toberer, P. Rauwel, S. Gariel, J. Taft and G. J. Snyder, J.
6 | Journal Name, [year], [vol], 00–00
Page 6 of 7
View Article Online
DOI: 10.1039/C4RA14655G
- PF= 32.90
- PF= 1.24
Acknowledgements: The authors are thankful to Dr.
Tejeshree Bhave, Dr. Prasanth Alegaonkar, DIAT, Pune and Dr.
P.Wadgaonkar and his group
.
Notes and references
RSC Advances Accepted Manuscript
a
High Energy Materials Research Laboratory(Defence
Research & Development Organization), Sutarwadi, Pune,
India-411 021
Fax: (+91)-20-25869316, E-mail: abhidey_bkn @yahoo.com
b
Rubber Technology Centre, Indian Institute of Technology,
Kharagpur, West Bengal, India
*Corresponding Authors. Fax: (+91)-20-25869316, E-mail:
abhidey_bkn@yahoo.com ( Shri Abhijit Dey)
ak_sikder@yahoo.com (Dr. A.K.Sikder)
santanuchat71@yahoo.com (Dr. Santanu Chattopadhyay)
† Electronic Supplementary Information (ESI) available: [details of raw
materials, instrumentation, nano Fe2O3 synthesis, Photograph of nano iron
oxide, graphene and GINC, additional HRTEM images, BET data,
Raman mapping, Detail procedure for thermoelectric properties
measurement, Summary of thermoelectric properties of the best
composite of inorganic and organic materials.]. See
DOI: 10.1039/b000000x/
Mater. Chem., 2010, 20, 9877.
18. X. Yan, B. Poudel, Y. Ma, W. S. Liu, G. Joshi, H. Wang, Y. Lan, D.
Wang, Z. G.Chenand and F. Ren, Nano Lett., 2010, 10, 3373.
19. H. Li, X. Tang, Q. Zhang and C. Uher, Appl. Phys. Lett., 2008, 93,
252109(1-3).
20. M Martín-González, O. Caballero-Calero and P. Díaz-Chao,
Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev., 2013, 24, 288.
21. C. V. Manzano, A.A. Rojas, M. Decepida, B. Abad, Y. Feliz, O.
Caballero-Calero, D. A. Borca-Tasciuc and M. Martin-Gonzalez,, J.
Solid State Electrochem. 2013, 17, 2071.
22. R.B Aïch, N. Blouin, A Bouchard and M. Leclerc, Chem. Mater.,
2009, 21, 751.
23. O. Bubnova, Z.U. Khan, A.Malti, S.Braun, M. Fahlman, M. Berggren,
and X. Crispin, Nat. Mater., 2011, 10, 429.
24. T. Park, C. Park, B. Kim, H. Shin, E. Kim, Energy Environ. Sci.,
2013, 6, 788.
25. G. H. Kim, L. Shao, K. Zhang and K. P. Pipe, Nat. Mater., 2013, 12,
719
26. C.L. Choy, Polymer 1977, 18, 984.
27. M. Hu, D. Yu and J. Wei, Polym. Test., 2007, 26, 333.
28. H. Kaneko, T. Ishiguro, A. Takahashi and J.Tsukamoto, Synth. Met.,
1993, 57, 4900.
29. E. R.Holland, S.J Pomfret, P. N. Adams, L. Abell and P. Monkman
Synth. Met., 1997, 84, 777.
30. J. Li, X. Tang, H. Li, Y. Yan and Q. Zhang, Synth. Met., 2010, 160,
1153.
31. Y. Qi, Z. Wang, M. Zhang, F. Yanga and X. Wang, J. Mater.
Chem. A, 2013, 1, 6110
32. J. R. Szczech, J. M. Higgins and S. Jin J. Mater.Chem., 2011,21,
4037.
33. R. Benoit, V. Hornebecq, F. Weill, L. Lecren, X. Bourrat and M.
T. Delapierre, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2013,1, 14221
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry [year]
 Page 7 of 7 RSC Advances
View Article Online
DOI: 10.1039/C4RA14655G

34. C. Yu, Y. S Kim, D. Kim and J. C. Grunlan, Nano Lett., 2008, 8,

4428.
35. C. Bounioux, P. Diaz-Chao, M. Campoy-Quiles, M. S Martin-
Gonzalez, A.R. Goni, R. Yerushalmi-Rozen and C. Muller, Energy
5 Environ. Sci., 2013, 6, 918.
36. Y. Lu, Y. Song, F Wang, Mater. Chem. Phys., 2013, 138, 238.
37. Y. Du, S. Z. Shen, W. Yang, R. Donelson, K. Cai, P. S. Casey,
Published on 09 December 2014. Downloaded by University of California - San Francisco on 16/12/2014 02:41:10.

Synth. Met., 2012, 161, 2688.

38. J. Xiang, L and T. Drzal, Polymer 2012, 53, 4202.
10 39. M.Scholdt, H. Do, J. Lang, A. Gall, A. Colsmann, U. Lemmer, J.
Koenig, M. Winkler and H. Boettner, J. Electron. Mater., 2010, 39,
1589.
40. H. Park, S. H. Lee, F. S. Kim, H. H. Choi, I. W.

RSC Advances Accepted Manuscript

Cheong and J. H. Kim, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2014, 2, 6532.
15 41. A.W. Musumeci, G. G. Silva, J.W. Liu and W.N. Martens,
E.R.Waclawik, Polymer, 2007, 48, 1667.
42. Y. Zhao, G.S. Tang, Z.Z. Yu and J.S. Qi, Carbon, 2012, 50, 3064.
43. Y.W. Park, Y.S. Lee, C. Park, L.W. Shacklette and R.H. Baughman,
Solid State Commun., 1987, 63, 1063.
20 44. K. Lee, S.Cho, H.P. Sung, A. J. Heeger, C.W. Lee and S.H. Lee,
Nature, 2006, 441, 65.
45. K.I.Winey and R. A. Vaia, MRS Bull., 2007, 32, 314.
46. R.D. Sherman, L.M. Middleman and S.M. Jacobs, Polym. Eng. Sci.,
1983, 23, 36.
25 47. S. Kirkpatrick, Rev. Mod. Phys., 1973, 45, 574.
48. C. Fu, G.Zhao, H.Zhang, S. Li. Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 2014, 9, 46.
49. S.Walia, S.Balendhran, H. Nili, S. Zhuiykov, G.Rosengarten,
Q.H.Wang, M. Bhaskaran, S. Sriram, M.S.Strano, and K.
Kalantar-zadeh, Prog. Mat. Sci. 2013, 58(8), 1443-1489.
30 50. G. Zhou, D.W.Wang, F. Li, L. Zhang, N. Li, Z.S.Wu, L. Wen, G.Q.
Lu and H.M. Cheng, Chem. Mater. 2010, 22, 5306.
51. D. Kim, M.Sc Thesis, Texas A&M University, 2009
52. T. Mori, T. Nishimura, K. Yamaura, and E. T.Muromachi, J.
Appl. Phys.2007, 101, 093714 (1-4).
35 52. C. Yu, K. Choi, L. Yin and J.C. Grunlan, ACS Nano, 2011, 5, 7885.
54. M. He, F. Qiu, and Z. Lin, Energy. Environ. Sci. 2013, 6, 1352
55. Y.S.Kim, D. Kim, K.J. Martin, C. Yu and J.C. Grunlan, Macromol.
Mater. Eng. 2010, 295, 431.
56. K.Choi, C. Yu, PLOS one 2012, 7(9), e44977.
40 57. G.P. Moriarty, J.N.Wheeler, C. Yu and J. C.Grunlan, Carbon 2012,
50, 885.
58. D.D. Freeman, K. Choi and C. Yu, PLOS one 2012, 7(11),
e47822.

This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry [year] Journal Name, [year], [vol], 00–00 | 7