Research on Green Radio

Communications Networks
Name: Gehad Abdelaziz Mohamed

id: 52010393

1. Introduction:
Energy efficiency in cellular networks has received significant attention from both
academia and industry because of the importance of reducing the operational
expenditures and maintaining the profitability of cellular networks, in addition to making
these networks “greener.” Because the base station is the primary energy consumer in
the network, efforts have been made to study base station energy consumption and to
find ways to improve energy efficiency. In this paper, we present a brief review of the
techniques that have been used recently to improve energy efficiency, such as energy-
efficient power amplifier techniques, time-domain techniques, cell switching,
management of the physical layer through multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO)
management, heterogeneous network architectures based on Micro-Pico-Femtocells,
cell zooming, and relay techniques. In addition, this paper discusses the advantages
and disadvantages of each technique to contribute to a better understanding of each of
the techniques and thereby offer clear insights to researchers about how to choose the
best ways to reduce energy consumption in future green radio networks.

the cellular network sector has developed rapidly. This rapid growth is due to the
increases in the numbers of mobile subscribers, multimedia applications, and data
rates. According to [1], the data transmission rate doubles by a factor of approximately
ten every five years. Figure 1 shows how the number of subscribers in cellular networks
have increased [2].

The increase in the number of mobile subscribers has led to an increase in data traffic;
as a result, the number of base stations (BSs) has increased to meet the needs of
customers. Reference [3] describes the growth in the number of BSs in developing
regions between 2007 and 2012, and forecasted that the total number of BSs would
increase by over 2 million within this period. Most of the previous studies on this subject
have focused on improving both system capacity and data rates, while neglecting the
increasing demand of cellular networks for energy. This increasing energy demand has
prompted considerable research on the subject of “green communications.” This paper
discusses the issue of energy efficiency in communications networks. Perhaps the two
most important reasons to pursue the development of green communications networks
are increases in carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) and increases in operational
expenditures (OPEX). CO2 emissions are mainly associated with off-grid sites that
provide coverage for remote areas. Most such sites are powered by diesel-power
generators. According to [4], in 2002, the amount of CO2 emissions associated with
information and communication technology (ICT) was 151 Mt CO 2. The mobile
communication sector was responsible for 43% of this total, and this proportion is
expected to increase to 51% of the total, or 349 MtCO 2, by 2020. With respect to the
economics of the sector, [5] indicates that ICT currently consumes 600 TWh (Terawatt
hours) of electrical energy and that this consumption is expected to increase to 1,700
TWh by 2030. Cellular networks represent the largest component of the ICT sector.
Figure 2 illustrates the total electricity consumption by communication networks around
the world. Energy consumption by cellular networks is expected to increase rapidly in
the future if no measures are taken to alter this trend [6].

Figure 1

Worldwide electricity consumption by communication networks [6].

The above-mentioned statistics have motivated researchers in both academia and

industry to develop techniques to reduce the energy consumption of cellular networks,
thereby maintaining profitability and making cellular networks “greener.” Reference [7]
highlighted the goals associated with green cellular networks:(i)improvement of energy
efficiency,(ii)improvement of the intelligence of the network through tradeoffs between
energy consumption and external conditions, that is, traffic loads,(iii)integration of the
network infrastructure and network services to enable the network to be more
responsive and to require less power to operate,(iv)reduced carbon emissions.

As shown in Figure 3, the BS is the main energy consumer in a cellular network [8].
Reference [3] indicated that the numbers of BSs are increasing and will continue to
increase in the future to guarantee the quality of service (QoS) expected by mobile
subscribers. As a result, energy consumption by base stations will continue to increase.
Therefore, an effort is required to reduce the energy consumption of base stations,
while continuing to provide the expected quality of service, taking into account the
associated cost. The energy consumed by a BS consists of two components. The fixed
component represents the energy consumed by the internal components of the BS, as
shown in Figure 4, which require further classification of the components of BS sites
and the energy consumption of each component. The dynamic component represents
the energy consumed in RF transmission [9]. Thus, the solutions have two components:
first, the hardware solution, for which the focus is on improving the energy consumption
in the BS components, such as power amplifiers (PAs), digital signal processors
(DSPs), cooling systems, and feeder cables and second, intelligent management of
network elements based on traffic load variations.
we provide a brief overview of the techniques that have been considered in previous
studies for use in saving energy, including a discussion of the principles of operation,
the advantages, and the shortcomings of each technique. The graph shown in
Figure 2 classifies the different techniques that will be discussed in the following
sections.

Figure 2
Classifications of energy-saving techniques.
The remainder of the paper is organised as follows. Section 2 discusses energy
efficiency metrics. The energy consumption in the internal components of a BS,
especially the power amplifier, is discussed in Section 3. Sections 4 through 7 address
time-domain energy-efficient techniques, cell switch on/off techniques, energy-efficient
network architectures, and transmission scheme. Finally, we compare the techniques
considered in Section 8 and highlight each technique’s contribution to energy-efficient
radio communication.

2. Energy Efficiency Metrics:

Energy efficiency metrics provide information that can be used to assess and compare
the energy consumption of various components of a cellular network and of the network
as a whole. These metrics also help us to set long-term research goals for reducing
energy consumption. With the increase in research activities pertaining to green
communication and due to the intrinsic differences and relevance of various
communication systems and performance measures, it is difficult for one single metric
to suffice. Hence, several standardisation bodies and forums have considered energy
efficiency in their network implementation strategies. However, energy efficiency metrics
have been classified in three main categories in [10], that is, (i) facility-level, (ii)
equipment-level, and (iii) network-level metrics. Reference [11], on the other hand,
highlighted another type of metric, called the access-node level. The facility-level metric
refers to high-level systems (such as data centres). The Green Grid (TGG) association
of IT professionals proposed the metrics of power usage efficiency (PUE) and data
centre efficiency (DCE) to evaluate energy efficiency in data centres [12]. Despite being
a good metric for quickly assessing the performance of data centres at a macrolevel,
PUE, which is defined as the ratio of total facility power consumption to total equipment
power consumption, fails to account for the energy efficiency of individual pieces of
equipment. Therefore, to quantify efficiency at the equipment level, a measure of the
ratio of the energy consumption to the performance of a communication system would
be more appropriate. Facility-level metrics assess initial power usage but do not reflect
the energy efficiency of individual pieces of equipment. Thus, equipment-level metric,
such as power amplifier efficiency metric, which quantify the performance of individual
pieces of equipment, are required. The ATIS has introduced the telecommunications
energy efficiency ratio (TEER), which is the ratio of useful work to power consumption
and is measured in units of Gbps/Watt. Another equipment-level metric, the
telecommunications equipment energy efficiency rating (TEEER), introduced by Verizon
Networks and Building Systems, quantifies the total energy consumption as the
weighted sum of the amounts of energy consumed by the equipment under different
load conditions. Another equipment-level metric is the energy consumption rating
(ECR), which is the ratio of the energy consumption to the effective system capacity,
measured in units of Watt/Gbps [13]. However, even the busiest networks do not always
operate under fullload conditions. Therefore, it would be useful to complement metrics
such as the ECR to incorporate dynamic network conditions such as energy
consumption under fullload, halfload, and idle conditions. Other metrics suitable for
these purposes include the ECRW (weighted ECR), ECR-VL (energy efficiency over a
variable-load cycle), and ECR-EX (energy efficiency over an extended-idle load cycle).
Hence, ECR provides manufacturers insight into the performance of hardware
components. However, these metrics (ECR, TEER, and TEEER) are unable to capture
all the properties of a system. While the definitions of energy efficiency metrics at the
component and equipment levels are fairly straightforward, it is more challenging to
define energy efficiency metrics at the system or network level. Network-level metrics
assess energy efficiency at the network level by considering the features and properties
of the capacity and coverage of the network. The ETSI has defined two network-level
energy efficiency metrics. The first metric is the ratio of the total coverage area to the
power consumed at the site and is measured in units of km 2/Watt. The second metric is
the ratio of the number of subscribers to the power consumed at the site and is
measured in units of users/Watt [10]. Some specific metrics have been used to measure
the performance of computing processing associated with energy consumption, in units
such as millions of instructions per second per watt (MIPS/W) and millions of floating-
point operations per second per watt (MFLOPS/W) [10]. Reference [14] highlighted a
metric with units of energy per bit per unit area (J/bit/m 2). This metric relates energy
consumption to the number of transferred bits and the area of coverage. This is
equivalent to analysing the average power usage with respect to the average rate and
the area of coverage (W/bps/m2). A rich set of metrics exists at the access node level.
The ECR quantifies the energy used to transmit a piece of information (Joules/bit).
Some other metrics quantify the utility of various resources with respect to existing
tradeoffs, such as the spectral efficiency (b/s/Hz) and the power efficiency (b/s/Hz/W).
One metric intended to cover all the aspects in a more general way is the radio
efficiency ((b·m)/s/Hz/W) [15], which reflects the data transmission rate and the
transmission distance that is attainable for a given bandwidth and level of power
supplied. To summarise the discussion above, a nonexhaustive list of energy metrics is
given in Table 1. In addition, reference [16] discusses in detail the tradeoffs among
several different energy efficiency metrics, such as deployment efficiency versus energy
efficiency, spectrum efficiency versus energy efficiency, bandwidth versus power, and
delay versus power. However, the most popular metric for measuring the performance
of the system is “bits per Joule,” which is the number of bits transmitted per Joule of
energy. Interested readers can find a more comprehensive taxonomy of green metrics
in [14, 17]. Reaching a consensus on a small set of standard energy metrics in future
will not only accelerate research activities in green communications but also help to
pave the way towards standardisation.

3. Power Amplifier Improvement:

Several approaches to improving the energy efficiency of the internal components of a
BS are discussed in [18, 19]. These approaches include reducing the amount of energy
consumed by cooling systems, feeder cables, and power amplifiers (PAs). PAs have
attracted the largest share of attention in previous studies because they represent the
greatest proportion of the energy consumption of BSs. In mobile communications, the
power amplifier in a macrobase station consumes the most energy, 65% of the total
energy consumed by all BS elements, as shown earlier in Figure 3. Consequently,
highly efficient power amplifiers are essential to reducing OPEX costs for mobile
network operators. The most efficient PA operating point is close to the maximum
output power (near saturation). Unfortunately, nonlinear effects and OFDM modulation
with nonconstant envelope signals force the power amplifier to operate in a more linear
region, that is, 6 to 12 dB below saturation [20]. In this subsection, we review several
methods that have been used to improve power amplifier energy efficiency. The first
technique, known as Doherty designs [21], is a special design technique used to
improve PA energy efficiency. The use of Doherty designs has improved energy
efficiency by 30 to 35% over a narrow bandwidth [10]. The enhancement can be further
improved to over 50% using a digital predistorted Doherty architecture and gallium
nitride (GaN) amplifiers [22]. GaN is a special material used in the manufacture of PA
transistors. The same energy efficiency enhancement has been achieved through the
use of crest factor reduction (CFR) and digital predistortion (DPD) with Doherty PAs
[18]. Reference [11] considered a class J amplifier, a switched-mode power amplifier
(SMPA) and a drain modulation technique with higher energy efficiency than a
predistorted Doherty amplifier and found that the class AB with digital predistortion
improves the PA efficiency by 50%. Ghannouchi et al. [23] proposed an inverse class F
PA designed for WiMAX applications at a carrier frequency within a range centred at
approximately 2.45 GHz. A detailed analysis and discussion of the classes can be found
in [24]. In addition, it has been noted that many factors must be taken into account in PA
design, including the following:
(i)high linearity, to satisfy higher-order modulation schemes,
(ii)greater average output power levels,
(iii)broader operating bandwidths,
(iv)OPEX reductions achieved by decreasing BS energy consumption.

At present, PAs operate on high levels of DC power supply, independent of the traffic
load. Thus, for a major part of the day, power is wasted [20]. The reduction in power
consumption can be addressed in two ways. The first approach defines the operating
point adjustment of power amplifiers needed to minimise the power consumption at
arbitrary signal levels, so that the power efficiency is optimised for low, medium, and
high traffic loads [25]. The second approach involves the deactivation of power amplifier
stages to save power during time slots without signal transmission. More detailed
analysis and discussion can be found in [26].

Despite many efforts, hardware technologies for reducing energy consumption at the
base station have not been able to achieve significant energy savings. Moreover, one
cannot ignore the amount of energy that is wasted by inefficient utilisation of resources.
These factors have led to a solution that utilises both equipment-level and network-level
approaches. The network-level approaches seek to tune network-related parameters
based on the sensing of external conditions, which enables the determination of the
optimal transmission strategies for energy savings. The philosophy behind all the
proposed methods is the same, reducing energy consumption based on the traffic load.
In the following section, we will review how network-level approaches can help to
improve the energy efficiency.

4. Time Domain Energy Efficiency:

Time-domain solutions seek to reduce the PA operating time by reducing control signals
during low traffic or in the idle-case situation. Therefore, the amount of energy that can
be saved using this approach depends on the PA offtime. In [27], the reduction in
control signals with respect to the reference signals (RSs) was investigated. The uses of
RSs in the network in this approach are listed as follows [28]:(i)UE channel estimation
(coherent demodulation of downlink transmissions).(ii)UE cell-search measurements,
both for neighbour-cell measurements for handover and for measurements before initial
access.

In the long-term evolution (LTE) system, each frame includes 10 subframes (from 0 to
9). In [28], three ways to reduce the number of RSs are discussed: (i) normal unicast,
(ii) multicast broadcast single-frequency networks (MBSFN), and (iii) cell discontinuous
transmission (DTX), also known as the “microsleep” technique in some of the
references in [29]. Normal unicast RSs, inserted at the 0th, 4th, 7th, and 11th OFDM
symbols at every subframe, have been applied to subframes 1–4 and 6–9 and not to
subframes 0 and 5, due to the need to transmit RSs and control signals, such as the
primary synchronisation signal, the secondary synchronisation signal, and the broadcast
channel control. The second form of RS, known as MBSF, seeks to further decrease the
power amplifier transmission time by reducing the number of RSs to 1. If there are no
active UEs in the idle traffic situation, there is no need to transmit RSs in subframes 1–4
and 6–9. This approach is the principle of DTX. Figure 3 illustrates the principles of
these different techniques. In addition, Table 1 summarises the energy savings and on-
time PA for each technique. Reference [30] determined some of the characteristics of
these approaches, such as the impact on the specification, the impact on service,
backward compatibility, and process time.

Table 1
Energy savings and on-time PA for different time domain techniques.
 Similarly, in [31], switching off an optimum number of subframes per radio frame
at low traffic loads was proposed.

Advantages. Clearly, this technique can result in a significant amount of energy savings
in the idle traffic case. This means that it is an appropriate solution for rural areas. In
addition, this technique saves energy in other components, such as ADC/DAC devices,
DSP units, and cooling systems, during the switched-off periods.

Shortcomings. An insufficient quantity of RSs may cause some of the users to

encounter problems during the synchronisation process with the BS, and thus, the UEs
may be unable to enter into the DTX mode, thereby leading to a negative impact on the
battery life of the UEs. In addition, some of the UEs may face difficulties in decoding the
control signal.

5. Cell Switch On/Off:

Switching off unused wireless resources and devices has become the most popular
approach to reducing power consumption by cellular networks because it can save
large amounts of energy. Cell switching is based on the traffic load conditions: if the
traffic is low in a given area, some cells will be switched off, and the radio coverage and
service will be provided by the remaining active cells. Therefore, the active cells will
increase their transmission power to cover the area of the inactive cells. This may lead
to a lack of coverage, because the BS maximum power is limited. A recent solution to
this problem has been published in [32]. The authors propose an optimisation approach
that achieves significant reductions in network energy consumption while abiding by the
most important QoS constraints. The model proposed is a set of real-size universal
mobile telecommunications system (UMTS) network instances consisting of various
radio propagation environments. The results show that the proposed optimisation
approach achieves significant reductions in network energy consumption (monthly
energy savings between 35 and 57%) while respecting the most important QoS
constraints, such as full area coverage and guaranteed service rates.

Switching cells off can be accomplished in both single-layer (macrocell) networks and
multilayer network (such as HetNet). Reference [33] presents an overview of the energy
savings achieved for a multilayer network. Obviously, not all the cells in a network have
the same capability to execute switch off/on operations. Accordingly, the network sites
are classified as coverage sites or capacity sites. Capacity booster cells can execute
switch off/on operations in accordance with the operator’s deployment policy, while
coverage is guaranteed by coverage cells.

Conditions of Cell Switch off/on. Both eNB and operation, administration, and
maintenance (OAM) systems can initiate cell switch off/on operations in response to
various trigger mechanisms. The eNB depends on the real-time traffic load of its cells,
while OAM systems depend on the historical statistics for the traffic load of a wide range
of cells.

Cell Deactivation. The eNB will notify its neighbouring eNBs by X2 signalling to inform
them that a specific cell will be switched off. The neighbouring eNBs will not allow their
resident UEs to hand over control to that cell. In OAM systems, cell deactivation is
initiated by explicit OAM commands for cell deactivation that are transmitted via Itf-N
and then set down to the eNB. When the eNB successfully or unsuccessfully switches
off the cell, it will return a response signal to the OAM system.

Cell Activation. It is initiated by the neighbouring eNB’s trigger mechanism, which

monitors the traffic load in the same area. An explicit X2 signalling message concerning
cell activation is expected to request that the eNB that is in the cell deactivation state
switches on to the original state again, that is, becomes active. Therefore, the
neighbouring eNBs will allow their resident UEs to hand over control to this recovered
cell again. For OAM, cell activation is similar to the cell deactivation that is initiated by
the OAM’s trigger mechanism. When the eNB successfully or unsuccessfully switches
on the cell, it will return a response signal to the OAM system.

Reference [34] provides an overview of the cell on/off switch schemes or macrosleep in
a single-layer network and describes how, when, and where to apply them in the
scenario for rural macrocells at low traffic loads. It is important to keep in mind that in
real networks, it is impossible to switch off a random number of BSs because switching
off is restricted by their configuration. The energy savings in this approach depends on
the number of cells that will be turned off. If a large number of cells are turned off, then
the energy savings will be substantial. In addition, a tradeoff between the number of
cells that will be turned off and the QoS should be considered, as discussed in [35];
accounting for this tradeoff it can achieve energy savings of 50%. The same authors, in
[36], improved on their idea by introducing two different scenarios based on the UMTS
network environment. The uniform scenario is based on the deployment of several
identical microcells and a hierarchical scenario. In this scenario, an amendment to the
topology of the network is implemented so that it contains one umbrella-cell overlap with
many of the microcells. Marsan et al. demonstrated in [37] how to optimise energy
savings by assuming that any fraction of cells can be switched off according to a
deterministic traffic variation pattern over time and demonstrated that this approach can
reduce energy consumption by between 25 and 30%. Reference [9] describes a study
of the optimal number of active BSs that would be deployed based on the tradeoff
between fixed power and dynamic power. Under various traffic load conditions, the
energy savings can range from 12% to 40%. Reference [38] proposed the use of BSs
with sleep/wake-up technology. A BS runs in active, sleep, or off mode depending on
the traffic load. Each BS is augmented with an extra functional component, known as
the “sleep/wake-up module,” which is mainly used when the BS enters the sleep or
wake-up mode. The energy consumption of the BS can be reduced by 72.9% using this
strategy. Bousia et al. in [39] proposed a switching-off decision based on the average
distance between BSs and UEs, whereby the BS at the maximum average distance will
be switched off. This technique can achieve a reduction of up to 29% in energy
consumption. Most of the previous studies that have discussed the energy efficiency
problem have assumed that the conversion from switched on to switch off is
instantaneous. Note that the switching period is very important because of its direct
impact on the UEs in the cell. Reference [40] investigated the average time required for
the implementation of the BS switch off by taking into account the handover process
from the switched-off BS to a new BS. In addition, [30], the processing time, which takes
between 50 and 100 ms of handover (HO) time, was highlighted. Reference [41]

Advantages. As mentioned earlier, the PA consumes the most power in a BS.

Therefore, the cell switch-off approach achieves a good balance between performance,
by providing coverage from neighbouring cells, and energy savings, by switching off
some of the cells.

Shortcomings. Based on the traffic load, some cells are inactive and others are active;
therefore, the active cells will increase their transmission power to cover the areas not
covered by the inactive cells. There are several drawbacks to this method. First, the BS
maximum power is limited; accordingly, there will be some areas without coverage,
which can contribute to a decline in the quality of service. Second, the increase in power
of the active cells reduces the energy savings. Finally, this approach reduces battery life
for users because they require higher receiver power to connect with the other cells,
which can be located at long distances away from them.

6. Energy-Efficient Architecture:
This approach is considered a special case of the cell switch-off approach. The principle
of this approach depends on the cooperation of the BSs to provide service to the users
and provide energy savings in the event of low traffic. In this section, we present cell
zooming, heterogeneous networks (HetNets), and relay techniques.

6.1. Cell Zooming

References [42, 43] proposed a cell capability to allow for the adjustment of the size of
the cell according to the traffic load. When congestion occurs at the cell due to an
increase in the number of UEs, the congested cell could zoom in, while the
neighbouring cells with smaller amounts of traffic could zoom out to provide the
coverage for UEs that cannot be served by the congested cell. If the neighbouring cells
can provide coverage without the congested cell zooming in, then the congested cell
can enter into sleep mode to reduce energy consumption. The major component of this
design is a cell-zooming server (CS) [42]. However, if the cells that must zoom out to
provide coverage to the neighbouring cells that have switched off cannot provide this
coverage due to the limited maximum transmission power of the BS, then an increase in
energy consumption occurs because the neighbouring cells are unable to switch off,
and there are areas without coverage, that is, coverage holes. In [44, 45], this problem
was addressed through the deployment of more small cells to further improve energy
consumption; that is, more cells can be switched off than in the traditional scheme.
However, as the number of small cells increases, the fixed power of the BSs (e.g., the
power required for cooling and for the power supply) also increases.

Advantages. This technique can improve the throughput and lengthen the UE’s battery
life.

Shortcomings. There are several drawbacks, as this physical adjustment technique

depends on the transmission power of the BS. The BS’s maximum transmission power
is limited. In addition, when the remaining active cells increase their power during the
zooming-out period, a problem of intercell interference emerges. Inter-cell interference
occurs when all the neighbouring cells zoom out during the same time interval.

6.2. Heterogeneous Networks (HetNets)

Heterogeneous networks have a layered structure that combines different networks to

serve the same mobile devices. Heterogeneous networks are intended to improve both
throughput and energy consumption through the deployment of a network of cells of
small size (such as micro-, pico-, and femtocells).

The mechanism of these networks is further discussed in [33]. Macrocells are deployed
to provide overall coverage, while small cells become active if the demand increases.
Based on this approach, a joint deployment strategy was investigated in [46] utilising
microcells within a macrocell network, and the impact on energy consumption was
determined. In addition, the authors considered area power consumption as a
performance metric. The same authors, in [47], investigated the same issue in more
detail. They evaluated and optimised the average number of microsites per macrocell.
References [48, 49] investigated the energy efficiency of both homogeneous (pure
microcells and macrocells) and heterogeneous networks consisting of a varying number
of microsites, based on the traffic load conditions. The results of the study indicated that
homogeneous microdeployment achieves better energy efficiency heterogeneous
network deployment [50]. Calin et al. [51] provided an overview of a joint deployment of
femto- and macrocells. In addition, in [52, 53], the energy efficiency gains that can be
achieved through the deployment of femtocells within a microcell, while accounting for
the QoS, was discussed. The results indicated that the use of femtocells improved the
energy consumption of the joint network deployment studied. Reference [54] proposed
a new architecture called “FemtoWoC” to improve the energy efficiency through
wireless-over-cable (WoC) transmission. Reference [22] examined the impact on
energy efficiency of deployment of different picocell sizes in a macrocell. The simulation
results obtained indicated that this approach can reduce energy consumption by 60%
when used by 20% of customers within the picocell coverage area.

A recent study described in [55] offered excellent analytical models for the power
consumption in macrocells, microcells, picocells, and femtocells. This paper discussed
five classes of networks. For the class A network, the researchers considered a
femtocell-based network in which, instead of macrocells, an area is fully covered by
femtocells. The results showed that energy consumption was reduced by 82.72–
88.37%. In the class B network, the coverage area was divided into three parts: an
urban area, a suburban area, and a rural area, which were covered by femtocells,
macrocells and portable femtocells, respectively. The simulation results obtained show
that the total transmitted power was reduced by 78.53–80.19%. In the class C network,
femtocells, picocells, microcells, and portable femtocells were allocated in a densely
populated urban area, sparsely populated urban areas, suburban areas, and rural
areas, respectively, which reduced the total transmitted power by 9.19–9.79%. In the
class D network, microcells, picocells, and femtocells were allocated to border regions
and macrocells were allocated to the rest of a coverage area. The simulation results
obtained showed that the total transmitted power was reduced by 5.52–5.98%. In the
class E network, femtocells were allocated to the boundary region of the macrocell and
turned on in that region when the signal received from the macrocell BS was too low to
successfully receive or generate a call. When all the femtocells were kept on, the
macrocell shrinks in coverage area. The simulation results obtained showed that power
consumption was reduced by 1.94–2.66%.

Advantages. A smaller cell size leads to improvement in coverage and capacity for the
following reasons: lower transmission power, higher SINR, higher spectral efficiency,
low path loss, prolonged handset lifetime (due to short transmit-receive distances), and
smaller cells with lower costs.

Shortcomings. Despite the benefits that can be achieved by this technique, there are
some challenges that need to be addressed, including management of the interfaces
between heterogeneous environments and the dead zone problem.

6.3. Relay

Relay techniques are other means of saving energy, while improving network
performance. The principle of this class of techniques is based on the deployment of
relay nodes between the source (BS) and the destination (UEs). Relay nodes are
intended to save energy, while increasing the network throughput by providing short
transmission distances and thereby reducing path loss. In addition, the relay
architecture reduces inter-cell interference due to low transmission power. There are
two types of relay structures, namely, (i) pure relay systems and (ii) cooperative relay
systems. A pure relay system is composed of small linked relay nodes between the BS
and the UEs. Pure relay systems have been found to be more efficient than cooperative
systems, and in some cases, a net power gain can be achieved for highly efficient
relays. Additional benefits can be achieved when deploying relays to cover network
traffic hotspots. In addition[56]. In a cooperative relay system, several UEs act as the
relay nodes and form a cooperative network. The cooperative relay technique provides
path independence among different fading channels (a fundamental aspect of the
diversity gain concept), thereby achieving energy savings [57]. Reference [56]
highlighted the implementation of relay schemes for in-building deployment, which can
increase energy efficiency in comparison to P2P communication. The literature
suggests that the most important parameters in the design of relay networks are the
following: (i) the choice of the relay node, (ii) the relay strategy, and (iii) the allocation of
power and bandwidth for each user. Reference [58] discussed the optimal allocation of
energy and bandwidth for each user and the selection of the optimal relay node and the
optimal relay strategy (i.e., decode and forward versus amplify and forward), taking into
account both user traffic demand and the physical channel. Reference [59] discussed
several relay strategies, including the most significant ones: (i) amplify and forward
(AF), (ii) decode and forward (DF), and (iii) compress and forward (CF). Reference [20]
investigated hybrid relaying schemes, which allow the relay to dynamically switch
between DF and CF schemes according to its decoding status. The analysis results
showed that hybrid relaying achieves better energy efficiency performance than DF and
offers the best energy efficiency performance, especially at the cell edge. Reference
[60] discussed the impact on energy efficiency of the number of hops, the locations of
the hops, the allocated power, and the data rate of each hop. Reference [61]
investigated the improvement in energy efficiency of the users achieved by allocation of
the optimal power to maximise the energy efficiency (EE) of each user. The authors of
reference [62] proposed an energy-efficient single cooperative relay selection that
accounts for both the MAC layer protocol and the power control strategy when selecting
the node. Reference [63] investigated the energy consumption of single hops with fixed
transmission power and multihops with fixed transmission power and power control in
CDMA cellular networks. The results indicated that multihop with power control is better
in terms of energy consumption.

7. Transmission Scheme:
Multiinput and multioutput (MIMO) has become the main feature of the evolution of the
next generation of wireless networks. MIMO has the advantages of reducing fading and
increasing throughput without it being necessary to increase either the bandwidth or the
transmission power. These advantages can be achieved by introducing space-time
coding (STC), which exploits spatial diversity to overcome fading by sending the signal
that carries the same information through different paths, and by using spatial
multiplexing (SM), which exploits multiple paths to send more information. In this
subsection, we highlight the impact of MIMO transmission on energy efficiency.
Reference [64] discussed a tradeoff between the diversity gain and the multiplexing gain
in terms of the energy efficiency of wireless sensor networks. The discussion indicated
that the energy efficiency of MIMO transmissions can be higher than that of single-
input/single-output (SISO) transmission if the design is implemented properly. A
significant energy reduction can be achieved if both diversity gain and multiplexing gain
are used. The impact on energy efficiency of cooperative MIMO techniques with data
aggregation for wireless sensor networks was discussed in [65], which demonstrated
that energy consumption can be reduced by reducing the amount of data transmitted
and by using an efficient resource allocation scheme. Cui et al. [66] presented an MIMO
energy consumption model for both the transmitter and the receiver, based on
Alamouti’s diversity scheme. Using this model, the energy efficiency over various
transmission distances was studied, and the energy efficiency values were compared
with those obtained using a SISO system under the same conditions of throughput and
BER. The results of the comparison suggests that MIMO is not always more energy
efficient than SISO; indeed, at short distances, SISO may outperform MIMO in terms of
energy efficiency. In addition, MIMO is not efficient for low traffic loads because it
consumes more energy per circuit, as discussed in [67], in which switching between
MIMO and SIMO under dynamic loads was studied. The results of the study indicated
that SIMO achieves energy savings under low traffic loads. Some research studies have
also focused on the traffic load adaptation of MIMO antennae [68, 69]. Huawei and
Samsung discussed several methods for allowing the BS to change the number of
active antennae based on the traffic load conditions. Another approach is to reduce the
number of antennae based on the ratio of switch-off RF power amplifier units, for
example, switching from 4-antennae to 1-antenna transmission to reduce energy
consumption to 1/4 of the energy consumed in the 4-antennae case [70]. Each branch
of a MIMO antenna is connected to a PA, and the PA is the component that consumes
the most energy in a BS. Therefore, by using the adaptive MIMO approach, significant
energy savings can be achieved during network operations. Details of the MIMO energy
savings approach can be found in [69]. Reference [30] describes some of the benefits of
this approach, such as improvements in energy savings, processing time, and the
impact on network service.

Advantages. The MIMO scheme optimises the tradeoff between energy reduction and
throughput, while reducing cochannel interference.

Shortcomings. There are some drawbacks to the reduced MIMO antenna approach,
such as the need for a fixed antenna port during the active time of the BS and the
requirement that the number of switched on/off antennae may be communicated to the
UEs properly. Otherwise, the behaviour of the UEs will be impacted. In addition, a
reduction in the number of antennae can result in service degradation or interruption
during the antenna reconfiguration.
 8. Conclusion:
the wireless network aspects of green communication are addressed, including the
fundamental, that is, categorization of the concepts, trade-off between energy efficiency
and other efficiency metrics, the scales of achieved energy efficiency and the
relationship between the embodied energy and the energy saving potentials of the
current networks. It also covers not only base station considerations, network planning
and management, but other emerging paradigms, such as vehicular networks and
Internet of Things (IoT). In the second part, we focus on the energy efficient design and
management approaches for wired networks, where Ethernet and optical networks are
also discussed. The application, transport and network layer solutions are presented
and the standardization efforts are introduced. Generally speaking, almost every
individual aspect of green communications from wired and wireless perspectives is
touched.

9-References:
1. G. Fettweis and E. Zimmermann, “ICT energy consumption-trends and challenges,” in Proceedings of the
11th International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications (WPMC '08), pp. 1–6,
2008.
2. Livingston, V. (2012). HSPA and LTE mobile broadband in the Americas. In Proceedings of the
Workshop of 4G Americas.
3. Taverner, D. (2010). Community Power—Using Mobile to Extend the Grid. Groupe Speciale Mobile
Association (GSMA): London, UK, 1-77.
4. Global e-Sustainability Initiative. (2008). SMART 2020: Enabling the low carbon economy in the
information age.
5. Humar, I., Ge, X., Xiang, L., Jo, M., Chen, M., & Zhang, J. (2011). Rethinking energy efficiency models of
cellular networks with embodied energy. IEEE network, 25(2), 40-49.
6. S. Lambert, W. V. Heddeghem, W. Vereecken, B. Lannoo, D. Colle, and M. Pickavet, “Worldwide
electricity consumption of communication networks,” Optics Express, vol. 20, no. 26, pp. B513–B524,
2012.

7. Sandhu, S. S., Rawal, A., Kaur, P., & Gupta, N. (2012, February). Major components associated with
green networking in information communication technology systems. In 2012 International conference on
computing, communication and applications (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
8. Han, C., Harrold, T., Armour, S., Krikidis, I., Videv, S., Grant, P. M., ... & Hanzo, L. (2011). Green radio:
radio techniques to enable energy-efficient wireless networks. IEEE communications magazine, 49(6),
46-54.
9. L. Xiang, F. Pantisano, R. Verdone, X. Ge, and M. Chen, “Adaptive traffic load-balancing for green
cellular networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE 22nd International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and
Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC '11), pp. 41–45, September 2011.
10. Chen, T., Kim, H., & Yang, Y. (2010, October). Energy efficiency metrics for green wireless
communications. In 2010 International Conference on Wireless Communications & Signal Processing
(WCSP) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.

11. Suarez, L., Nuaymi, L., & Bonnin, J. M. (2012). An overview and classification of research approaches in
green wireless networks. Eurasip journal on wireless communications and networking, 2012, 1-18.
12. Belady, C., Rawson, A., Pfleuger, J., & Cader, T. (2008). Green grid data center power efficiency metrics:
PUE and DCIE. the green grid, 1.
13. A. Amanna, Green Communications, Institute for Critical Technology and Applied Science (ICTAS) at
Virginia tech, 2009.
14. Imran, M. A., Alonso-Rubio, J., Auer, G., Boldi, M., Braglia, M., Fazekas, P., ... & Wajda, W. (2011). Most
suitable efficiency metrics and utility functions. EARTH Project Report, 1-89.
15. Zhao, L., Cai, J., & Zhang, H. (2011, May). Radio-efficient adaptive modulation and coding: Green
communication perspective. In 2011 IEEE 73rd Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring) (pp. 1-5).
IEEE.
16. Chen, Y., Zhang, S., Xu, S., & Li, G. Y. (2011). Fundamental trade-offs on green wireless networks. IEEE
Communications Magazine, 49(6), 30-37.
17. Hamdoun, H., Loskot, P., O’Farrell, T., & He, J. (2012). Survey and applications of standardized energy
metrics to mobile networks. Annals of telecommunications-annales des télécommunications, 67, 113-123.
18. ATIS Exploratory Group on Green (EGG), “ATIS report on wireless network energy efficiency,” Alliance
for Telecommunications Industry Solutions, 2010.
19. Mobile, V. C. E. (2019). Power Amplifiers for 4G and beyond—managing the efficiency, bandwidth and
linearity tradeoff.
20. Auer, G., Blume, O., Giannini, V., Godor, I., Imran, M., Jading, Y., ... & Wajda, W. (2010). D2. 3: Energy
efficiency analysis of the reference systems, areas of improvements and target breakdown. Earth, 20(10).
21. H. F. Raab, “Efficiency of doherty RF power-amplifier systems,” IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting, vol.
33, no. 3, pp. 77–83, 1987.
22. H. Claussen, L. T. W. Ho, and F. Pivit, “Effects of joint macrocell and residential picocell deployment on
the network energy efficiency,” in Proceedings of the IEEE 19th International Symposium on Personal,
Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC '08), pp. 1–6, September 2008.
23. F. M. Ghannouchi, M. M. Ebrahimi, and M. Helaoui, “Inverse class f power amplifier for WiMAX
applications with 74% efficiency at 2.45 GHz,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on
Communications Workshops (ICC '09), pp. 1–5, June 2009.
24. B. Berglund, J. Johansson, and T. Lejon, “High efficiency power amplifiers,” Ericsson Review, vol. 83, no.
3, pp. 92–96, 2006.
25. D. Ferling, A. Ambrosy, S. Petersson et al., “Final report on green radio technologies,” EARTH Project
Report, Deliverable D4.3, pp. 1–121, 2012.
26. D. Ferling, A. Ambrosy, S. Petersson et al., “Green radio technologies,” EARTH Project Report,
Deliverable D4.2, pp. 1–89, 2012.
27. T. Chen, Y. Yang, H. Zhang, H. Kim, and K. Horneman, “Network energy saving technologies for green
wireless access networks,” IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 30–38, 2011.
28. 3GPP R1-100387, “Extended cell DTX,” 2010,
29. M. Imran, A. Ambrosy, O. Blume et al., “Final integrated concept,” EARTH Project Report, Deliverable
D6.4, pp. 1–95, 2012.
30. 3GPP R2-101213, “Energy saving techniques for LTE,” 2010,
31. R. Wang, J. S. Thompson, and H. Haas, “A novel time-domain sleep mode design for energy-efficient
LTE,” in Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Communications, Control, and Signal
Processing (ISCCSP '10), pp. 1–4, March 2010.
32. J. Lorincz, A. Capone, and D. Begusic, “Impact of service rates and base station switching granularity on
energy consumption of cellular networks,” EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and
Networking, vol. 2012, 342, 2012.
33. 3GPP R3-100162, “Overview to LTE energy saving solutions to cell switch off/on,” 2010,
34. E. Calvanese-Strinati, M. Kamoun, and M. Sarkiss, “Green network technologies,” EARTH Project Report,
Deliverable D3.2, pp. 1–101, 2012.
35. L. Chiaraviglio, D. Ciullo, M. Meo, and M. A. Marsan, “Energy-aware UMTS access networks,”
in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications
(WPMC ’08), pp. 1–8, 2008.
36. L. Chiaraviglio, D. Ciullo, M. Meo, and M. A. Marsan, “Energy-efficient management of UMTS access
networks,” in Proceedings of the 21st International Teletraffic Congress (ITC '09), pp. 1–8, September
2009.
37. M. A. Marsan, L. Chiaraviglio, D. Ciullo, and M. Meo, “Optimal energy savings in cellular access
networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC
'09), pp. 1–5, June 2009.
38. M. F. Hossain, K. S. Munasinghe, and A. Jamalipour, “A protocooperation-based sleep-wake architecture
for next generation green cellular access networks,” in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference
on Signal Processing and Communication Systems (ICSPCS '2010), pp. 1–8, December 2010.
39. A. Bousia, A. Antonopoulos, L. Alonso, and C. Verikoukis, “‘Green’ distance-aware base station sleeping
algorithm in LTE-advanced,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications
(ICC '12), pp. 1–5, 2012.
40. M. A. Marsan, L. Chiaraviglio, D. Ciullo, and M. Meo, “Switch-off transients in cellular access networks
with sleep modes,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops
(ICC '11), pp. 1–6, June 2011.
41. F. Han, Z. Safar, S. W. Lin, Y. Chen, and K. J. R. Liu, “Energy-efficient cellular network operation via base
station cooperation,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC '12),
pp. 4374–4378, 2012.
42. Z. Niu, Y. Wu, J. Gong, and Z. Yang, “Cell zooming for cost-efficient green cellular networks,” IEEE
Communications Magazine, vol. 48, no. 11, pp. 74–79, 2010.
43. R. Balasubramaniam, Cell zooming techniques for power efficient base station operation [M.S. thesis],
Electrical Engineering, San Diego State University, 2012.
44. X. Weng, D. Cao, and Z. Niu, “Energy-efficient cellular network planning under insufficient cell zooming,”
in Proceedings of the IEEE 73rd Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC '11), pp. 1–5, May 2011.
45. Z. Niu, “TANGO: traffic-aware network planning and green operation,” IEEE Wireless Communications,
vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 25–29, 2011.
46. F. Richter, A. J. Fehske, and G. P. Fettweis, “Energy efficiency aspects of base station deployment
strategies for cellular networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE 70th Vehicular Technology Conference Fall
(VTC '09), pp. 1–5, September 2009.
47. A. J. Fehske, F. Richter, and G. P. Fettweis, “Energy efficiency improvements through micro sites in
cellular mobile radio networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Globecom Workshops, pp. 1–5, December
2009.
48. F. Richter and G. Fettweis, “Cellular mobile network densification utilizing micro base stations,”
in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC '10), pp. 1–5, May 2010.
49. F. Richter, A. J. Fehske, M. Patrick, and G. P. Fettweis, “Traffic demand and energy efficiency in
heterogeneous cellular mobile radio networks,” in Proceedings of the 71st IEEE Vehicular Technology
Conference (VTC '10), pp. 1–6, 2010.
50. V. Chandrasekhar, J. G. Andrews, and A. Gatherer, “Femtocell networks: a survey,” IEEE
Communications Magazine, vol. 46, no. 9, pp. 59–67, 2008.
51. D. Calin, H. Claussen, and H. Uzunalioglu, “On femto deployment architectures and macrocell offloading
benefits in joint macro-femto deployments,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 26–32,
2010.
52. Y. Hou and D. I. Laurenson, “Energy efficiency of high QoS heterogeneous wireless communication
network,” in Proceedings of the IEEE 72nd Vehicular Technology Conference Fall (VTC '10), pp. 1–5,
September 2010.
53. F. Cao and Z. Fan, “The tradeoff between energy efficiency and system performance of femtocell
deployment,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Wireless Communication Systems
(ISWCS '10), pp. 315–319, September 2010.
54. J. Gambini and U. Spagnolini, “Wireless over cable for energy-efficient femtocell systems,”
in Proceedings of the IEEE Globecom Workshops (GC '10), pp. 1464–1468, December 2010.
55. A. Mukherjee, S. Bhat t acherjee, S. Pal, and D. De, “Femt ocell based green power consumpt ion met
hods for mobile net work,” Computer Networks, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 62–178, 2013.
56. I. Gódor, L. Hévizi, O. Blume et al., “Final report on green network technologies,” EARTH Project Report,
Deliverable D3.3, pp. 1–131, 2012.
57. G. Y. Li, Z. Xu, C. Xiong et al., “Energy-efficient wireless communications: tutorial, survey, and open
issues,” IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 28–35, 2011.
58. T. C.-Y. Ng and W. Yu, “Joint optimization of relay strategies and resource allocations in cooperative
cellular networks,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 328–339,
2007.
59. Y. Yang, H. Hu, J. Xu, and G. Mao, “Relay technologies for WiMAX and LTE-advanced mobile
systems,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 47, no. 10, pp. 100–105, 2009.
60. C. Bae and W. E. Stark, “Energy-bandwidth tradeoff with spatial reuse in wireless multi-hop networks,”
in Proceedings of the IEEE Military Communications Conference (MILCOM '08), pp. 1–7, November
2008.
61. M. Nokleby and B. Aazhang, “User cooperation for energy-efficient cellular communications,”
in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC '10), pp. 1–5, May 2010.
62. Z. Zhou, S. Zhou, J.-H. Cui, and S. Cui, “Energy-efficient cooperative communication based on power
control and selective single-relay in wireless sensor networks,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless
Communications, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 3066–3079, 2008.
63. A. Radwan and H. S. Hassanein, “Does multi-hop communication extend the battery life of mobile
terminals?” in Proceedings of the IEEE GLOBECOM, pp. 1–5, December 2006.
64. W. Liu, X. Li, and M. Chen, “Energy efficiency of MIMO transmissions in wireless sensor networks with
diversity and multiplexing gains,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics,
Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP '05), pp. IV897–IV900, March 2005.
65. Y. Gai, L. Zhang, and X. Shan, “Energy efficiency of cooperative MIMO with data aggregation in wireless
sensor networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference
(WCNC '07), pp. 792–797, March 2007.
66. S. Cui, A. J. Goldsmith, and A. Bahai, “Energy-efficiency of MIMO and cooperative MIMO techniques in
sensor networks,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 1089–1098,
2004.
67. H. Kim, C.-B. Chae, G. De Veciana, and R. W. Heath Jr., “A cross-layer approach to energy efficiency for
adaptive MIMO systems exploiting spare capacity,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol.
8, no. 8, pp. 4264–4275, 2009.
68. 3GPP R2-094677, “eNB power saving by changing antenna number,” 2009,
69. 3GPP R2-094851, “Number of antennas change,” 2009,
70. T. Chen, H. Zhang, Z. Zhao, and X. Chen, “Towards green wireless access networks,” in Proceedings of
the 5th International ICST Conference on Communications and Networking in China (ChinaCom '10), pp.
1–6, August 2010.