Highly-Efficient Thermoelectronic Conversion of Solar Energy and Heat into ElectricPower

S. Meir,1 C. Stephanos,1, 2 T.H. Geballe,3 and J. Mannhart2, ∗

1Center for Electronic Correlations and Magnetism,Experimental Physics VI, Augsburg University, 86135 Augsburg, Germany2Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research, 70659 Stuttgart, Germany

3Department of Applied Physics and Laboratory for Advanced Materials,Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-4045, USA

(Dated: 2013-01-15)

Electric power may, in principle, be generated in a highly efficient manner from heat created byfocused solar irradiation, chemical combustion, or nuclear decay by means of thermionic energyconversion. As the conversion efficiency of the thermionic process tends to be degraded by electronspace charges, the efficiencies of thermionic generators have amounted to only a fraction of thosefundamentally possible. We show that this space-charge problem can be resolved by shaping theelectric potential distribution of the converter such that the static electron space-charge clouds aretransformed into an output current. Although the technical development of practical generatorswill require further substantial efforts, we conclude that a highly efficient transformation of heat toelectric power may well be achieved.

I. INTRODUCTION

Electric power can be generated in a highly efficientmanner via thermionic energy conversion from heat cre-ated by focused solar irradiation or combustion of fos-sil fuels [1–4]. Generators based on the thermionic pro-cess could, if implemented, considerably enhance the effi-ciency of focused solar energy conversion or of coal com-bustion power plants [5], yielding a corresponding reduc-tion of CO2 emissions. In thermionic energy conversion avacuum is applied as the active material between the elec-trodes, rather than the solid conductors that give rise tothe thermoelectric effect [6]. Thereby, the parasitic heatconduction from the hot to the cold electrode is radicallydecreased.

Thermionic generators can operate with input tem-peratures Tin that are sufficiently high to match thetemperatures at which concentrating-solar power plantsor fossil-fuel power stations generate heat. In prin-ciple, electric power may therefore be generated fromthese energy sources with outstanding efficiency becausethe maximum possible efficiency – the Carnot efficiencyηC = 1 − Tout

Tin– increases with Tin, where Tout is the

generators output temperature. In contrast, a significantamount of energy is wasted today in the conversion ofheat to electricity. Coal, from which 40 % of the worldselectricity is currently generated [7], is burned in powerstations at ∼ 1500 ◦C, whereas, due to technical limita-tions, the steam turbines driven by this heat are operatedbelow ∼ 700 ◦C, to give but one example.

However, thermionic generators have never been de-ployed to harvest solar energy or to convert combustionheat into electricity in power stations [8] or cars [9], al-

∗ author to whom correspondence should be addressed,j.mannhart@fkf.mpg.de

though the conversion process is straightforward and ap-pears to be achievable: electrons are evaporated from aheated emitter electrode into vacuum, then the electronsdrift to the surface of a cooler collector electrode, wherethey condense [3, 6]. If used for solar energy harvesting,the quantum nature of light can be exploited for great ef-ficiency gains by using photon-enhanced thermionic emis-sion (PETE) [4]. PETE employs the photoeffect to en-hance electron emission by lifting the electron energy ina semiconducting emitter across the bandgap ∆ into theconduction band, from where the electrons are thermallyemitted. As a result of the electron flow, the electro-chemical potentials of the emitter and collector differ bya voltage Vout, and an output current Iout = Vout/Rl canbe sourced through a load resistor Rl. Turning this ele-gant operation principle into commercial devices has notyet been possible, however, because space-charge cloudssuppress the emission current for emitter-collector dis-tances of dec > 3–5µm [6, 10, 11]. Practical fabricationof emitter-collector assemblies that operate with the re-quired close tolerances at a temperature difference Te−Tc

of many hundred Kelvin was found to be highly chal-lenging [12]. In addition, for dec < 1µm, near-field in-frared thermal losses between emitter and collector be-come large [13]. For large dec, it has only been possi-ble to suppress the space charges by neutralizing them,which was done by inserting Cs+ ions into the space-charge cloud [14, 15], a method used in two 5 kW nuclear-powered thermionic generators aboard experimental So-viet satellites [12, 16]. With that approach, compensat-ing the space charge by ion injection causes a ∼ 50 % lossof output power Pout [9]. Novel schemes to suppress thespace charges by optimizing the generation of Cs+ [9]have yet to be demonstrated. Since the 1950s, whenthe space-charge problem was first approached [3, 6, 17],it has remained the main obstacle to achieving efficientthermionic generators [3, 9].

arX

iv:1

301.

3505

v1 [

cond

-mat

.mtr

l-sc

i] 1

5 Ja

n 20

13

2

(a)

(b)

(c)

FIG. 1. Sketch of the working principle of thermoelectronicgenerators without (left) and with (right) a gate. The gate,positively biased with Vge = 6 V, is mounted between emitterand collector; a homogeneous magnetic field is applied in x-direction. (a) Calculated potential profile. (b) Calculateddensity of electrons in the space-charge cloud. These electronsdo not reach the collector. (c) Calculated density of electronsin the emitter–collector current. These electrons do reach thecollector. The calculations and figures refer to the followingparameters: φe = 2.5 eV, φc = 0.9 eV, Te = 1227 ◦C (1500 K),Tc ≤ 250 ◦C, dec = 100µm, Vout = (φe − φc)/e, w → 0. Thelabels “µe” and “µc” refer to the electrochemical potentialof the emitter and collector; “hν” designates the incomingphotons; “c”, “g”, “e”, “v” denote the collector, gate, emitter,and vacuum locations, respectively. The data shown herewere calculated using the 1D model (see Appendix B 1).

II. RESOLVING THE SPACE-CHARGEPROBLEM WITH ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC

FIELDS

Here we show that the space-charge problem can besolved in a plasma-free process. This process involvesonly electrons but no ions. It is therefore best char-acterized as “thermoelectronic”. To remove the staticspace charges, a positively charged gate electrode is in-serted into the emitter–collector space to create a poten-tial trough. In a virtually lossless process this trough ac-celerates the electrons away from the emitter surface anddecelerates them as they approach the collector (Fig. 1).A nominally homogeneous magnetic fieldH applied alongthe electron trajectories prevents loss of the electrons to

a gate current Ig by directing them through holes in thegate on helical paths circling straight axes. This pro-cess turns the static space-charge cloud, which previouslyblocked the electron emission, into a useful output cur-rent (Fig. 1b,c). The design is analogous to that of ionthrusters used for spacecraft propulsion.

To investigate the effectiveness of the gate in remov-ing the space charges, we fabricated a set of thermo-electronic generators as model systems (Figs. 2a,b; seeAppendix A). The function of the generators was fur-thermore modeled by numerical calculations of the elec-tron emission, space-charge formation and electron tra-jectories (see Appendix B). Experiment and model cal-culations provide consistent evidence that, by applyingemitter-gate voltages of Vge∼ 2–10 V, the exact value be-ing a function of the geometrical design of the genera-tor, we can indeed remove the static space-charge clouds(Figs. 1b,c, 3a). The gate potential enables operation ofthe generators in vacuum with emitter–collector spacingsof tens of micrometers (see Fig. 3b).

Although, as will be shown below, the generators op-erate with high efficiencies at large dec, the value of theemitter–collector current Iec decreases with dec. Thisis illustrated by Fig. 3b, which shows that the densityJmax

ec of the emitter–collector current at which the max-imal output power is obtained, Imax

ec , scales for large dec

with 1/d2ec. At small dec, Jmax

ec approaches the currentdensity of gate-free generators, because the electric fieldbecomes small inside the mesh holes if dec � w, wherew is the grid-mesh diameter defined for hexagonal gridsas the distance between opposite corners. For grids withfinite conductor widths, Jmax

ec is furthermore reduced be-cause for t < 1, a fraction of the emitted current is lostto Ig. Here, t is the gate transparency, the fraction ofthe gate area not covered by the conductor. This effectcan be minimized by optimizing the gate geometry andby inducing an inhomogeneous electron emission, for ex-ample by using nanotubes grown on the emitter. In thelatter case, Jmax

ec may be increased further by gate-field-enhanced emission.

Having confirmed that the space-charge cloud has beenremoved, we now explore the efficiency η = Pout/Pin,with which these generators transform heat into elec-tric power. The output power of the generator, Pout =IoutVout, is maximal for Vout = (φe − φc)/e, where φe

and φc are the work functions of the emitter and the col-lector [21], respectively, and e is the elementary charge.For larger Vout, some of the electrons lack the energy toreach the collector, whereas Iec is independent of Vout

for smaller Vout. We start to identify the efficiency limitby considering a simplified, ideal case, in which the in-put power Pin is converted completely into an emitter–collector current consisting only of electrons at the vac-uum potential (E = 0). If the electrons are only ther-mally emitted, the requirement that the back-emissioncurrent from the collector is so small that Imax

ec is pos-itive entails that η < 1 − Tc

Te(see Appendix B 3). To

generate this ideal current, a power of Pin = Imaxec φe/e is

3

emitter

gate

collector

S. Meir et al., Fig. 2a

(a)

S. Meir et al., Fig. 2b

1 mm

(b) (c)

FIG. 2. (a) Photograph of a generator used in these experiments. The glowing orange disk (left) shows the back of the resistivelyheated emitter (BaO dispenser); the yellowish disk edge on the right shows the reflection of the glowing emitter on the collectorsurface (steel). (b) Micrograph of a grid (200-µm-thick tungsten foil, w = 0.6 mm) used as gate. (c) Setup of a possiblemicrofabricated generator. The emitter and collector consist of wafers coated with heterostructures (gray lines) designed forthe desired work function, thermal and infrared properties. The emitter and collector surfaces comprise nano-hillocks for localfield enhancements. The green areas mark the regions of the electron flow through the vacuum, the direction of Iout correspondsto the flow of positive charges.

required. Therefore, ηmax = 1− φc

φeis a strict upper limit

for the heat–to–electric power conversion efficiency. Thislimit also applies to devices in which the photoelectriceffect is used.

In real devices, η is reduced by several loss channels,which include the above-neglected thermal energy carriedfrom the emitter by Imax

ec , losses due to a finite Ig, radi-ation losses from the emitter, thermal conduction of thewires contacting the electrodes, and ohmic losses. Never-theless, only the loss by the electron heat current causesa fundamental bound for the efficiency; the other losseffects can in principle be reduced to very small values.

Figure 4 shows the results of the model calculationsof the generator efficiencies as a function of the gatevoltage, considering the above-mentioned losses (see Ap-pendix B 3). Starting at Vge = 0, η increases with Vge

as the gate potential sweeps the space charges into thecollector. This increase demonstrates the usefulness ofthe gate field. At higher Vge, η decreases because thespace charges have been removed and Vge does not en-hance Imax

ec beyond the maximum emission current, butincreases the power IgVge lost at the gate. For a given φe,η increases with increasing Te due to higher emission cur-rents until thermal radiation losses dominate. For the pa-rameter range considered realistic for applications (e.g.,dec = 30µm, t = 0.98, φc = 0.9 eV [22]), maximum effi-ciencies of ∼ 42 % are predicted. The calculated efficien-cies (Figs. 4) are consistent with previous calculations ofefficiencies of thermionic generators that were presumedto be devoid of space charges [2, 9, 13, 14, 23]. Theycompare well with those of photovoltaic solar cells [20],thermoelectric materials [18, 24], and focused solar me-chanical generators [25, 26]. The results on combined cy-cles shown in Fig. 4 reveal that by using thermoelectronicconverters as topping cycles the efficiency of state-of-the-art coal combustion plants may be increased from 45 %

to 54 %, corresponding to a reduction of emissions suchas CO2 by ∼ 17 %.

III. CONCLUSION

Optimization of the conversion efficiencies requires thedevelopment of metal or semiconductor surfaces with thedesired effective work functions and electron affinities,respectively, which may also be done by nanostructuringthe electrode surfaces. These surfaces need to be stable athigh temperatures in vacuum. The tunability of the gatefield opens possibilities to alter the converter parametersduring operation. Although the need to generate Cs+

ions to neutralize the space-charge cloud is eliminated,adatoms of elements such as Cs can be used to lower thework function of the electrodes, in particular of the col-lector. For high efficiency, the devices must be thermallyoptimized to minimize heat losses through the wiring.Furthermore, thermal radiation of the emitter must bereflected efficiently onto the electrode. For ballistic elec-tron transport between emitter and collector, a vacuumof better than 0.1 mbar is also required, reminiscent ofradio tubes.

Such devices may be realized, for example, in a flip-chip arrangement of oxide-coated wafers separated bytens of micrometers using thermal-insulation spacers assketched in Fig. 2c. This produces hundreds of Watts ofpower from active areas of some 100 cm2. The magneticfields, typically ≤ 1 T with large tolerances in strengthand spatial distribution, can be generated by permanentmagnets or, for applications such as power plants, bysuperconducting coils. Achieving viable, highly efficientdevices requires substantial further materials science ef-forts to develop the functional, possibly nanostructuredmaterials, as well as engineering efforts to achieve a stable

4

Iout (mA)

S. Meir et al., Fig. 3a

(a)

(b)

FIG. 3. (a) Output current and gate current measured asa function of Vout for several gate voltages at Te = 1000 ◦C,Tc = 500 ◦C, w = 1.6 mm and dec = 700µm. Nominallyidentical BaO dispenser cathodes (φe ∼ φc ∼ 2.2 eV) were usedfor the emitter and collector. (b) Measured and calculateddependences of Jmax

ec on dec. The data was measured atTe = 1100 ◦C, Tc ∼ 500 ◦C, Vge = 6 V; the calculated cur-rent density refers to the density within the gate mesh. Theoutput power densities Pout were calculated from Jmax

ec forφe = 3 eV using Pout = Jmax

ec (φe−φc)/e. The error bars referto the errors in determining φe, φc, and dec. The data forw → 0 and for the curve labeled “without gate” were calcu-lated using the 1D model including the thermal distributionof electron velocities (see Appendix B 1); the data for w > 0were calculated using the quasi-3D model (see Appendix B 2).

vacuum environment in order to minimize radiative andconductive heat losses, and to ensure competitive costs.Remarkably, however, no obstacles of a fundamental na-ture appear to impede highly efficient power generationbased on thermoelectronic energy converters.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors gratefully acknowledge discussions withH. Boschker, R. Kneer, T. Kopp, H. Queisser, A. Reller,H. Ruder, A. Schmehl, and J. Weis as well as technicalsupport by B. Fenk and A. Herrnberger. One of us (THG)would like to acknowledge informative conversations onthe use of triodes with longitudinal magnetic fields togenerate Cs plasmas in thermionic generation with thelate Boris Moyzhes, and also acknowledges support forpart of the work at Stanford by the U.S. Department ofEnergy, under contract DE-DE-AC02-76SF00515.

5

FIG. 4. Heat–to–electric-power conversion efficiencies calculated as a function of the gate voltage of stand-alone thermoelectronicgenerators working at a series of emitter temperatures (Tc = 200 ◦C) and of systems comprising a thermoelectronic generatoras topping cycle (dec = 30µm). In the combined-cycle systems, the thermoelectronic generators operate between Te andTs = 600 ◦C. The work functions were selected for optimal performance and Te = 1700 ◦C to allow a comparison with theefficiency given for the stand-alone system. State-of-the-art steam turbines were presumed to work as bottom cycle, receivingheat at Ts and converting it into electricity with η = 45 %. Owing to the high Tout of the thermoelectronic generator, φe andφc can have rather large values. For the calculation of the efficiencies of the thermoelectronic PETE analogue, a band gap of1.5 eV and electron affinities of 1.6 and 1.85 eV were considered for the stand-alone and the combined-cycle systems, respectively(see Appendix B 3). Light–to–electric-power conversion efficiencies for a light-concentration of 5000 are shown for the PETEsystems. The image also lists the efficiencies of hypothetical thermoelectric generators with figures of merit of ZT = 2 and 10 attemperatures between Tin and 200 ◦C (see [18] and Appendix B 3). For comparison, the maximum efficiency of single-junctionsolar cells is ∼ 34 % (Shockley–Queisser limit [19]) and the best research multi-junction photovoltaic cells have efficiencies of∼ 43.5 % [20].

6

Appendix A: Experimental Setup and Procedures

In the model systems the electrodes were mechanicallymounted in a vacuum chamber (base pressure 10−7 mbar)to facilitate the study of various converter configura-tions. As emitters, commercial, resistively heated BaO-dispenser cathodes [27] with a temperature-dependentwork function in the range 2.0 eV < φe < 2.5 eV and anemitting area of 2.8 cm2 were used. The gates were laser-cut tungsten foils, the spacers aluminum oxide foils, andthe collectors either consisted of polished steel plates orwere BaO-dispenser cathodes. The collector work func-tions were determined from the Iout(Vout)-characteristicsand additionally from the Richardson-Dushman satura-tion current. The emitters are ohmically heated, Te

was measured with a pyrometer. The magnetic fieldis generated by two stacks of NdFeB permanent mag-nets mounted on both sides of the emitter-gate-collectorassembly. They created at the gates ∼ (200 ± 10) mT.Photon-enhancement of the emission was not applied.Electrical measurements were performed with source-measurement units (Keithley 2400) in 4-wire sensing.

Appendix B: Model Calculations

1. One-dimensional models

For the calculations of the current densities in gate-free, plane-parallel configurations the one-dimensionalspace-charge theory of Langmuir [28] and Hatsopou-los [29] was used to determine the space-charge poten-tial. To incorporate the effect of the gate in the one-dimensional approach, these models were extended to in-clude the potential generated by an idealized gate, as-sumed to be a metal plate that is transparent for elec-trons and to create a homogeneous electric field. Cal-culations of the electric field of a patterned metal gridwith the commercial electric field solver COULOMB [30]showed that for dec > w the generated field is virtuallyidentical to the field of an idealized gate. The 3D calcu-lations of the electric field distribution and the electronpaths in the electric gate field and the applied magneticfield done with the commercial software LORENTZ [30]showed that the electrons are forced on quasi-one dimen-sional paths by the magnetic field and are thus channeledthrough the gate openings.

To explore Jmaxe as a function of Vge below we calculate

the course of the electric potential in the vacuum gap.For this we consider a symmetrical setup, the gate beinglocated in the middle between emitter and collector. Thegate potential for electrons is given by

ϕg(x) = −2Vge

decx for 0 ≤ x ≤ dec

2,

and

ϕg(x) = −2Vge

dec(dec − x) for

dec

2≤ x ≤ dec.

At maximum power output, emitter and collector havethe same local vacuum potential. We assume the collec-tor to be cold enough that back emission is negligible, asdiscussed in Ref. [29].

If the thermally distributed initial velocity of emittedelectrons is neglected, the Poisson equation is given by

∆Ψ(x) = − Jε0

(− 2e

meΨ(x)

)−1/2

,

where Ψ(x) is the total electrostatic potential for negativecharges, consisting of the contribution of the gate andthe space-charge potential. This equation is solved ana-lytically, analogous to the Child-Langmuir law [31, 32],yielding

J = ε0

√e

6me

V3/2ge

d2ec

. (B1)

Remarkably, the current density shows the same be-havior J ∝ V 3/2/d2 as the Child-Langmuir law.

If the thermal velocity distribution is included, thePoisson equation becomes

∆Ψ(x) = −en0

ε0exp

[− e

kBTΨ(x)

]·

·{

1± erf

[e

kBT(Ψmax −Ψ(x))

]},

where en0 is the space-charge density at the emitter sur-face and Ψmax the maximum of the space-charge poten-tial in the inter-electrode space. The plus sign is validfor x ≤ xmax, the minus sign for x ≥ xmax, with xmax

being the position of Ψmax. n0 can be determined fromthe Richardson-Dushman equation [29]; it is a functionof φe and Te. This self-consistent differential equationhas to be solved numerically.

We used Mathematica 8.0 for the numerical calcula-tions. For each iteration step, the change of the space-charge potential has to be kept small, as already a smallmodification of Ψ(x) can lead to a strong modificationor even a divergence of the solution. Therefore, the so-lution has to be approached slowly to impede a strongoscillatory behavior.

The model calculations labeled w → 0 in Fig. 3b wereobtained using the ideal transparent gate model includingthe electron velocity distribution.

2. The quasi-3-dimensional current tube model

To take the inhomogeneities of the electric field of thegate electrode into account, the interelectrode space was

7

subdivided into narrow prisms, which extend from theemitter to the collector surface. We calculated the av-erage gate potential in each prism with the electric fieldsolver COULOMB [30]. We apply a linear regression todetermine the mean electric field, which can be used inthe one-dimensional gate model. We then calculate thecurrent density for each prism separately. Thereby theinteractions between the prisms were neglected, whichis a good approximation for the case of small inhomo-geneities in the space-charge density. The total currentdensity was obtained by summing up the contributionsfrom all tubes.

Due to the high computational effort required to solvethe 1D model including the thermally distributed ini-tial electron velocity, the analytical solution (Eq. B1)was used to determine the current density, which yieldsa good approximation in the voltage range considered.However, it does not account for the temperature-dependence of the current density.

3. Efficiency calculations

Calculation of the ultimate efficiency limit

The Richardson-Dushman equation describes the cur-rent density for electrons emitted from a metal sur-face [33]. It is obtained by using the equation J = −nevand integrating the Fermi distribution fFD over all elec-trons with a positive velocity normal to the emitting sur-face, i.e.,

JRD = −e∫∫∫vx>0

d~vvxfFD(~v) ≈ eme

4π2~3exp

(−φkBT

)·

·∞∫

0

dvx

∞∫−∞

dvy

∞∫−∞

dvzvx exp

(−mev

2

2kBT

)=

= −ARDT2 exp

(−φkBT

). (B2)

ARD: Richardson-Dushman constant, φ: work function,T : surface temperature, v: electron velocity.

If all non-fundamental channels of heat loss are ne-glected, heat is lost from the emitter only by the trans-port of electrons. This electron cooling Pel is given by [29]

Pel =

∞∫0

dvx

∞∫−∞

dvy

∞∫−∞

dvzvx

(φ+

mev2

2

)fFD(v) =

=JRD

e(2kBTe + φe). (B3)

Assuming there is no space-charge cloud limiting thetransfer of electrons across the vacuum gap, both Jmax

e

and the back-emission Jmaxbe from the collector are given

by the respective Richardson-Dushman current densities(Eq. B2).

Taking into account the heat transported back to theemitter by the back-emission, the efficiency is obtainedto be:

η =Jmax

ec (φe − φc)

Jmaxe (φe + 2kBTe)− Jmax

be (φe + 2kBTc). (B4)

This value is known to always be smaller than theCarnot efficiency [3, 17].

However, the efficiency may be ultimately increased ifelectrons are emitted only at a discrete energy E0, so thatthe 2kBT -terms in Eqs. B3 and B4 disappear. For thiscase, however, the Richardson-Dushman equation doesnot apply. Instead, the emitted current density has to becalculated for a hypothetical material with the discreteenergy level E0, from which the emission of electrons oc-curs. This level may be at or above the vacuum levelEvac. This calculation can be performed by insertinga δ-function to describe the discrete density-of-states atE = E0. In this case, in Eq. B2 no Gaussian-integralhas to be determined and the resulting, discrete currentdensity JE0 does not have a term with coefficient T 2.

As for any thermoelectronic generator, an outputpower is only generated for

Jmaxec = Jmax

e − Jmaxbe = Jmax

e,E0 − Jmaxbe,E0 > 0,

implying

exp

(−φe

kBTe

)− exp

(−φc

kBTc

)> 0.

It follows

φc

φe>Tc

Te,

and therefore

η =Jmax

ec /e · (φe − φc)

Jmaxec /e · φe

=φe − φc

φe=

= 1− φc

φe< 1− Tc

Te= ηCarnot.

For J → 0, it follows

φc

φe→ Tc

Te,

and consequently:

η → ηCarnot.

As can be seen, the efficiency approaches the Carnotlimit if the net current across the vacuum gap approacheszero, i.e., if the system approaches equilibrium. Con-sequently, the output power approaches zero when theefficiency approaches the Carnot limit. This is a verytypical behavior for any realistic heat engine (see, e.g.,Refs. [34, 35]).

8

Stand-alone generators

To calculate the efficiency of realistic thermoelectronicgenerators, the calculations presented in Refs. [2, 14, 23]were extended to include both the gate energy loss andthe dependence of Imax

e on the gate voltage. In deter-mining the generator efficiency, the power Pg requiredto sustain the gate electric field is subtracted from theoutput power:

η =Pout − Pg

Pin,

where Pin is the heat input and Pout the power deliveredto the load. It is given by

Pout =

(φe − φc

e− Vlead

)Imaxec ,

with the net current flowing to the collector

Imaxec = tImax

e − Imaxbe ,

and the voltage drop in the leads connecting the loadwith the emitter (Rle) and collector (Rlc)

Vlead = Imaxec Rlc + (Imax

e − tImaxbe )Rle.

Here, Imaxe is the space-charge limited current emitted

from the emitter, which is calculated from the models de-scribed above and Imax

be the back-emission current emerg-ing from the collector. It has to be considered that Imax

beis also reduced by the space-charge potential. Therefore,it is given by

Imaxbe = IRD exp

(−Ψmax

kBTc

),

with the Richardson-Dushman current IRD and the max-imum of the inter-electrode potential Ψmax.

In the steady state the heat input equals the sum ofall channels of heat loss from the emitter:

Pin = Pel + Prad + Pcond,

with the electron cooling:

Pel =Imaxe

e(φe + Ψmax + 2kBTe)−

− tImaxbe

e(φe + Ψmax + 2kBTc), (B5)

the radiation cooling:

Prad = σεA(T 4e − tT 4

c ),

(A: emitter area, σ: Stefan-Boltzmann constant, ε ∼ 0.1:effective emissivity of the electrode system [14]) and theheat conduction across the emitter lead:

Pcond =L

2Rle(Te − T0)2 − Rle

2(Imax

e − tImaxbe )2,

where the lead is assumed to be metallic and to followthe Wiedemann-Franz law. With the Lorentz number Lthe thermal conductivity can consequently be expressedas LTmean/Rle. The load is assumed to be at ambienttemperature T0. The second term in this equation arisesfrom half of the Joule heat produced in the lead effec-tively being transported to the emitter, which can beshown by solving the heat flow equation [2].

Combined-cycle system

In combined cycle systems the heat rejected by thecollector (Prej) is used to drive a secondary heat engineworking at an efficiency of ηs. The power ηsPrej producedby this engine is added to the total produced power,hence

ηcc =Pout − Pg + ηsPrej

Pin.

In the steady state Prej is equivalent to the heat trans-ported to the collector, given by the sum of an electronic,radiation, and conduction term

Prej = Pelc + Pradc + Pcondc,

where

Pelc =tImax

e

e(φc + Ψmax + 2kBTe)−

− Imaxbe

e(φc + Ψmax + 2kBTc), (B6)

Pradc = σεA(tT 4e − T 4

c ),

and

Pcondc =L

2Rlc(Tc − T0)2 − (Imax

ec )2Rlc

2.

Losses specific to solar heating

For solar heated thermoelectronic generators anotherfundamental channel for heat loss arises which we takeinto account: to couple solar radiation into the emitter,the emitter needs to provide a highly absorbing surfaceAb (here “b” stands for black). This surface Ab has ahigh emissivity and therefore emits a thermal power Pb.The resulting, reduced light–to–electricity efficiency ηl isexpressed in terms of the heat–to–electricity efficiency η:

ηl = (1− σT 4e

cI0)η,

where c is the concentration-factor of the incoming solarradiation onto the absorbing spot on the emitter [36] andI0 the intensity of the incoming solar radiation.

9

PETE-efficiencies

To calculate the efficiency of a PETE device incorpo-rating a gate electrode, we first assume a given emittedcurrent density JPETE

e and emitter temperature Te. Thelatter is chosen such that the hypothetical Richardson-Dushman current density across the electron-affinity bar-rier (Ea) is at least 100 times larger than JPETE

e . For anideal PETE-device we then expect an electron yield of 1electron per above-bandgap-photon [4], as photoexcitedelectrons can then be assumed to be thermally emittedsignificantly faster than they recombine.

From JPETEe , which defines the emission capability of

the emitter, we then calculate the space-charge limitedcurrent density Jmax

ec from the 1D model described above(taking into account the thermally distributed startingvelocity of the electrons). This defines the input poweractually required to maintain a stable emitter tempera-ture and, consequently, the required incident light con-centration ceff . For the data shown, this typically yieldsceff ∼ 500. To satisfy the self-consistency, from ceff andJmax

ec we finally calculate the bandgap ∆ that yieldsthe required rate of photoexcitations into the conductionband.

We assume the chemical potential to be in the middlebetween the worst case (middle of the bandgap) and thebest case (bottom of the bandgap). Consequently, theemitter work-function is

φe = Ea +3

4∆.

From φe and Jmaxec the efficiencies of both stand-alone

and combined-cycle PETE devices can be calculated asdescribed above.

Intrinsic electronic heat losses

Below, the relative importance of the channels of heatloss will be discussed for the peak of the efficiency of the1600 ◦C-curve shown in Fig. 4. Although the resultingnumbers may slightly vary for other configurations, theratios of the different contributions remain essentially thesame.

At the peak of the efficiency of the 1600 ◦C-curveshown in Fig. 4 the total input power of Pin =78.1 W/cm2 is mainly consumed by the electron cool-ing of Pel = 67.3 W/cm2. Therefrom, 60.0 W/cm2 areconsumed by the emitted electrons to overcome φe and7.3 W/cm2 arise from the thermally distributed elec-tron velocity (the 2kBT -terms in Eqs. B5 and B6).The remaining loss splits up between thermal radiation(Prad = 7.0 W/cm2) and conduction across the lead wires(Pcond = 3.8 W/cm2). In this configuration the systemdelivers a power of Pout = 36.4 W/cm2 to the load cycle,while Pg = 4.0 W/cm2 are consumed on the gate. Theresulting net output power of 32.4 W/cm2 corresponds toan efficiency of η = 42 %.

Efficiency of thermoelectric generators

For comparison, efficiencies of hypothetical thermo-electric generators are given in Fig. 4. Those were calcu-lated following, e.g., Ref. [24]:

η = (1− Tout

Tin)

√1 + ZT − 1√

1 + ZT + Tout/Tin

.

[1] W. Schlichter, Die spontane Elektronenemissiongluhender Metalle und das gluhelektrische Element,Ann. Phys. 47, 573–640 (1915).

[2] J. H. Ingold, Calculation of the maximum efficiency of thethermionic converter, J. Appl. Phys. 32, 769–772 (1961).

[3] G. N. Hatsopoulos and E. P. Gyftopoulos, ThermionicEnergy Conversion Volume I: Processes and Devices(MIT Press, Cambridge and London, 1973).

[4] J. W. Schwede, I. Bargatin, D. C. Riley, B. E. Hardin,S. J. Rosenthal, Y. Sun, F. Schmitt, P. Pianetta, R. T.Howe, Z.-X. Shen, and N. A. Melosh, Photon-enhancedthermionic emission for solar concentrator systems, Nat.Mater. 9, 762–767 (2010).

[5] G. O. Fitzpatrick, E. J. Britt, and B. Moyzhes, Updatedperspective on the potential for thermionic conversion tomeet 21st century energy needs, in Proc. 32nd Interso-ciety Energy Conversion Engineering Conf., IECEC-97(1997) pp. 1045 –1051 vol.2.

[6] A. F. Ioffe, Semiconductor Thermoelements and Thermo-electric Cooling (Infosearch Ltd. London, London, 1957).

[7] Key World Energy Statistics 2012 , Tech. Rep. (Interna-tional Energy Agency, 2012).

[8] R. E. Engdahl, A. J. Cassano, and R. B. Dowdell,Thermionics in fossil-fuel and nuclear central power sta-tions, Combustion 41, 24–& (1970).

[9] B. Y. Moyzhes and T. H. Geballe, The thermionic en-ergy converter as a topping cycle for more efficient heatengines—new triode designs with a longitudinal magneticfield, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 38, 782–786 (2005).

[10] G. N. Hatsopoulos and J. Kaye, Measured thermal ef-ficiencies of a diode configuration of a thermo electronengine, J. Appl. Phys. 29, 1124–1125 (1958).

[11] H. Moss, Thermionic diodes as energy converters, J. Elec-tron. Control 2, 305–322 (1957).

[12] National Research Council. Committee on ThermionicResearch and Technology., Thermionics Quo Vadis? AnAssessment of the DTRA’s Advanced Thermionics Re-search and Development Program (National AcademyPress, Washington D.C., 2001).

[13] J.-H. Lee, I. Bargatin, N. A. Melosh, and R. T. Howe,Optimal emitter-collector gap for thermionic energy con-verters, Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 173904 1–4 (2012).

[14] N. S. Rasor, Thermionic energy-conversion plasmas,IEEE T. Plasma Sci. 19, 1191–1208 (1991).

10

[15] N. S. Rasor, Emission physics of the thermionic energyconverter, Proc. IEEE 51, 733–747 (1963).

[16] N. N. Ponomarev-Stepnoi, V. M. Talyzin, and V. A.Usov, Russian space nuclear power and nuclear thermalpropulsion systems, Nucl. News 43, 33–46 (2000).

[17] F. G Baksht, G. A Dyvzhev, A. M Martsinovskiy,B. Y Moyzhes, G. Y Dikus, E. B Sonin, andV. G Yuryev, Thermionic converters and low-temperatureplasma, NASA STI/Recon Technical Report N 80, 17579(1978).

[18] L. E. Bell, Cooling, heating, generating power, and re-covering waste heat with thermoelectric systems, Science321, 1457–1461 (2008).

[19] W. Shockley and H. J. Queisser, Detailed balance limit ofefficiency of p-n junction solar cells, J. Appl. Phys. 32,510–519 (1961).

[20] M. A. Green, K. Emery, Y. Hishikawa, W. Warta, andE. D. Dunlop, Solar cell efficiency tables (version 40),Prog. Photovoltaics 20, 606–614 (2012).

[21] Following common usage, (e.g., [37]), we define the workfunction of a material as the energy required to move anelectron with an energy equaling the chemical potentialfrom inside the material to a location far away from thesurface.

[22] F. A. M. Koeck, R. J. Nemanich, A. Lazea, andK. Haenen, Thermionic electron emission from low work-function phosphorus doped diamond films, Diam. Relat.Mat. 18, 789–791 (2009).

[23] J. M. Houston, Theoretical efficiency of the thermionicenergy converter, J. Appl. Phys. 30, 481–487 (1959).

[24] G. J. Snyder and E. S. Toberer, Complex thermoelectricmaterials, Nat. Mater. 7, 105–114 (2008).

[25] H. Muller-Steinhagen and F. Trieb, Concentrating solarpower, Ingenia , 43–50 (2004).

[26] C. Richter, ed., SolarPACES Annual Report 2009 (In-ternational Energy Agency, 2010) available from www.

solarpaces-csp.org/Library/AnnualReports.[27] HeatWave Labs Inc., 195 Aviation Way, Suite 100, Wat-

sonville, CA 95076-2069, USA.[28] I. Langmuir, The effect of space charge and initial veloc-

ities on the potential distribution and thermionic currentbetween parallel plane electrodes, Phys. Rev. 21, 419–435(1923).

[29] G. N. Hatsopoulos and E. P Gyftopoulos, ThermionicEnergy Conversion Volume II: Theory, Technology andApplication (MIT Press, Cambridge and London, 1979).

[30] Integrated Engineering Software, IES. (2011),COULOMB, AMPERES, and LORENTZ, version9.0, www.integratedsoft.com.

[31] I. Langmuir, The effect of space charge and residual gaseson thermionic currents in high vacuum, Phys. Rev. 2,450–486 (1913).

[32] C. D. Child, Discharge from hot CaO, Phys. Rev. 32,492–511 (1911).

[33] N. W. Ashcroft and N. D. Mermin, Solid state physics(Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1976).

[34] F. L. Curzon and B. Ahlborn, Efficiency of a carnot en-gine at maximum power output, Am. J. Phys. 43, 22(1975).

[35] H. U. Fuchs, The dynamics of heat (Springer, New York,1996).

[36] c is not to be confused with the effective concentration ceff

that is relevant in the context of PETE. It is cAb = ceffA.[37] N. D. Lang and W. Kohn, Theory of metal surfaces -

work function, Phys. Rev. B 3, 1215–1223 (1971).