Two-Way Energy Trading and Online Planning for
Fifth-Generation Communications with Renewables
Xiaojing Chen1,3, Xin Wang1 , Wei Ni2 , and Iain B. Collings3

arXiv:1710.00151v1 [cs.SY] 30 Sep 2017

1

Key Lab of EMW Information (MoE), Dept. of Commun. Sci. & Engr., Fudan University, Shanghai, China
2
CSIRO, Sydney, NSW 2122, Australia
3
School of Engineering, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2122, Australia

Abstract—Future fifth-generation (5G) cellular networks,
equipped with energy harvesting devices, are uniquely positioned
to closely interoperate with smart grid. New interoperable functionalities are discussed in stochastic two-way energy trading
and online planning to improve efficiency and productivity.
Challenges lie in the unavailability of a-priori knowledge on future wireless channels, energy pricing and harvesting. Lyapunov
optimization techniques are utilized to address the challenges and
stochastically optimize energy trading and planning. Particularly,
it is able to decouple the optimization of energy trading and
planning during individual time slots, hence eliminating the need
for joint optimization across a large number of slots.
Keywords: Fifth-Generation (5G), smart grid, two-way energy
trading, energy planning, stochastic optimization.

I. I NTRODUCTION
Communication network and smart grid have been independently evolving despite both aiming to substantially improve
productivity, efficiency and sustainability. On one hand, the upcoming fifth-generation (5G) cellular networks are anticipated
to be densely deployed with a significantly reduced coverage
area per cell. This is due to explosively increasing mobile traffic and propagation-unfriendly high-frequency spectrum which
only avails for communication purpose [1]. Unfortunately,
the overall energy consumption of base stations (BSs) would
become increasingly overwhelming, and contribute adversely
to the reduction of global carbon dioxide emissions. On the
other hand, smart grid is expected to usher in controllability, interoperability and sustainable exploitation of renewable
energy sources, or renewables (RES) for short. Equipped
with smart meters, smart grid is able to embrace brand new
functionalities such as distributed energy generation, two-way
energy flows, energy trading and redistribution, and energy
demand management [2].
This paper explores the potential of co-evolution of communication system and smart grid, as is becoming prominently
important due to the fact that BSs are increasingly equipped
with energy harvesting capabilities, such as solar panels and
wind turbines [3], for economical and ecological purposes.
RES (e.g., up to 10,000 KW per BS) can be harvested to
supplement persistent supplies from the conventional power
grid and power cellular systems [4]. Manufacturers, such
as Ericsson, Huawei, and Vodafone, have started developing
Work in this paper was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China grants 61671154 and the Innovation Program of Shanghai
Municipal Education Commission.

“green” BSs that can be powered jointly by persistent supplies
and harvested RES [3].
Under the co-evolution of communication system and smart
grid, traditional energy consumers, such as BSs, can potentially become an integral part of the grid, generate and
redistribute energy, and trade energy with the grid through
the smart meters. The BSs can purchase energy off the grid
while in shortage of RES, and sell extra energy back to the
grid when RES are in abundance [2]. Such two-way energy
trading (TWET) allows extra energy to be redistributed for
environmental benefits and financial gains of 5G. Moreover,
the energy prices of the smart grid can diverge contractually
over different timescales, i.e., real-time price (e.g., per minute)
versus long-term price for days or months. While wireless
transmissions and energy consumptions are real-time, energy
harvesting depending on ambient environments can operate
at an interval of minutes or hours different from the realtime and long-term energy pricing intervals. To this end, a
foresighted plan of energy usage in advance, also known as
“multi-timescale energy planning (MTEP)”, is important to
balance energy load and relieve pressure on the grid, and hence
improve the reliability and sustainability of the grid.
In this paper, we present a new framework of TWET and
MTEP, where stochastic optimization theory is exploited to
capture the temporal and spatial randomnesses of both 5G
and smart grid in terms of energy price, RES availability, and
wireless channel. The minimization of the time-average energy
cost of 5G subject to the time-varying harvested RES amounts
and energy prices is asymptotically equivalently reformulated
to the minimization of a convex closed-form upper bound
of the instantaneous cost per timeslot, which in turn can be
optimally solved by using convex techniques. This approach is
further extrapolated to the case of multiple different timescales,
where the instantaneous minimization per timeslot is carried
out under the prediction of future RES arrivals and energy
prices at longer time horizons based on the past. Extensive
simulations show that the energy cost with MTEP can be saved
up to 58%.
In a different yet relevant context, a range of energy-efficient
transmission schemes have been developed for 5G systems. In
[5], a string tautening algorithm was proposed to produce the
most energy-efficient schedule for delay-limited traffic, first
under the assumption of negligible circuit power, and then

Solar panel

Main grid
Energy
switch

Two-way
energy flow

Smart
meter
Battery

Wireless
gateway

Two-way information flow
Mobile user

Smart
meter

Internet

BS

Wind turbine

Fig. 1. A smart grid powered CoMP system. Two BSs with local RES
harvesting devices and batteries perform TWET with the main grid.

extended to non-negligible constant circuit powers [6], [7]
and energy-harvesting communications [8], [9]. Particularly,
coordinated multi-point (CoMP) enables BSs to collaborate for
effective inter-cell interference management, thereby substantially improving the energy efficiency of 5G. This technology
has been standardized by 3GPP, and extensively studied for
energy-efficient applications [10]. Other active researches on
energy-aware wireless techniques are under the way to guaranteeing the quality of service (QoS) of wireless applications
using non-persistent RES [11], [12].
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section II,
the system model is presented. In Sections III and IV, we
propose the new TWET and MTEP algorithms. In Section V,
the asymptotic optimality of the proposed algorithms is established. In Section VI, numerical results demonstrate the
merits of the proposed schemes, followed by conclusions in
Section VII.
II. S YSTEM M ODEL
As illustrated in Fig. 1, we consider a CoMP downlink system, where a set of I := {1, . . . , I} BSs (e.g.,
macro/micro/pico BSs) serves a set of K := {1, . . . , K}
mobile users. Each BS is equipped with M transmit antennas,
and each user has a single receive antenna. Assume that BSs
can harvest RES to support their transmissions. Furthermore,
each BS can purchase energy from or sell energy to the grid
at time-varying prices via TWET. Equipped with batteries, the
BSs can take advantage of energy price fluctuations, and can
store energy for later use. All BSs are connected to a central
controller, which not only collects the communication data
from BSs, but also the energy prices via locally installed smart
meters.
Suppose that the transmissions are slot-based and experience
quasi-static downlink channels, which remain invariant within
a slot and vary between slots. For illustration convenience, the
slot duration is normalized to unity, so “energy” and “power”
become interchangeably used throughout this paper.
A. CoMP Transmissions
Consider a scheduling horizon indexed by the set T :=
{0, . . . , T − 1}. Per slot t, let hik,t ∈ CM denote the
vector channel from BS i to user k, ∀i ∈ I, ∀k ∈ K; let

hk,t := [h′1k,t , . . . , h′Ik,t ]′ collect the channel vectors from
all BSs to user k, and Ht := [h1,t . . . . , hK,t ]. With linear
transmit beamforming performed across the BSs, the vector
signal transmitted to user k is: qk (t) = wk (t)sk (t), ∀k,
where sk (t) is the information-bearing scalar symbol with
unit-energy, and wk (t) ∈ CMI is the beamforming vector
across the BSs serving user k. The received vector for user
k at slot t is therefore
X
yk (t) = hH
hH
(1)
k,t qk (t) +
k,t ql (t) + nk (t)
l6=k

P
where
is the desired signal of user k, l6=k hH
k,t ql (t)
is the inter-user interference, and nk (t) is an additive circularly
symmetric complex Gaussian (CSCG) noise with zero mean
and variance σk2 .
The signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) at user k
is given by
hH
k,t qk (t)

SINRk ({wk (t)}) = P

2
|hH
k,t wk (t)|

H
2
l6=k (|hk,t wl (t)| )

+ σk2

.

The transmit power at BS i is given by
X
Px,i (t) =
wkH (t)Bi wk (t)

(2)

(3)

k∈K

where the matrix






Bi := diag 0, . . . , 0, 1, . . . , 1, 0, . . . , 0 ∈ RMI×MI
| {z } | {z } | {z }
(i−1)M

M

(I−i)M

selects the corresponding rows out of {wk (t)}k∈K to form the
i-th BS’s beamforming vector of size M × 1.
To guarantee QoS per slot user k, the central controller
selects a set of {wk (t)} satisfying [cf. (2)]
SINRk ({wk (t)}) ≥ γk ,

∀k

(4)

where γk denotes the target SINR value per user k.
B. Smart Grid Operations
Each BS exploits RES. Let At := [A1 (t), . . . , AI (t)]′
collect the harvested RES at slot t across all BSs. Let Ci0
denote the initial stored energy, and Ci (t) the state of charge
of BS i at the beginning of slot t. Each battery has a finite
capacity Cimax . A minimum level Cimin is required at any time
for the sake of battery health. With Pb,i (t) denoting the amount
of battery charging (Pb,i (t) > 0) or discharging (Pb,i (t) < 0)
at slot t, the stored energy then obeys: ∀i, t,
Ci (t + 1) = Ci (t) + Pb,i (t),

Cimin ≤ Ci (t) ≤ Cimax . (5)

The amount of energy (dis)charged is bounded by
min
max
Pb,i
≤ Pb,i (t) ≤ Pb,i

(6)

min
max
where Pb,i
< 0 and Pb,i
> 0.
The total energy consumption Pg,i (t) of BS i consists of the
beamformers’ transmit power Px,i (t), and a constant power
Pc > 0 consumed by air conditioning, data processor, and

max
circuits. The total consumption Pg,i (t) is bounded by Pg,i
.
Therefore,
X
H
max
Pg,i (t) = Pc + Px,i (t) = Pc +
wkt Bi wkt ≤ Pg,i
(7)
k∈K

The grid can supply Pg,i (t) if the harvested RES are
insufficient. A BS can also sell its surplus energy (whenever
the RES are abundant) back to the grid. It is clear that the
shortage energy of BS i that needs to be purchased from the
grid is max{Pg,i (t) − Ai (t) + Pb,i (t), 0}, while the surplus
energy is max{Ai (t) − Pg,i (t) − Pb,i (t), 0}.
With the buying and selling prices αt and βt , the condition
αt ≥ βt holds to avoid meaningless buy-and-sell activities. Per
slot t, the energy transaction cost of BS i is therefore given
in a convex form by

G(Pg,i (t), Pb,i (t)) = max αt [Pg,i (t) − Ai (t) + Pb,i (t)],
βt [Ai (t) − Pg,i (t) − Pb,i (t)]

(8)

Note that at any slot each BS can either purchase electricity
from the grid at price αt , or sell surplus to the grid at the
price βt . For conciseness, we concatenate all the variables; i.e.,
ξt := {αt , βt , At , Ht , ∀t}, and suppose that ξt is independent
and identically distributed (i.i.d.) across time.
III. S INGLE -T IMESCALE TWET
Over the scheduling horizon T , the central controller of
CoMP seeks the optimal schedule for cooperative transmit
beamforming vectors {wk (t)}k,t and battery (dis)charging
energy
P
P{Pb,i (t)}i,t , to minimize the total network cost
t∈T
i∈I G(Pg,i (t), Pb,i (t)), while guaranteeing QoS, i.e.,
SINRk ({wk (t)}) ≥ γk , ∀k, t. The problem of interest is
formulated as
G∗ :=

T −1
1 XX
E[G(Pg,i (t), Pb,i (t))]
{wk (t),Pb,i (t),Cit } T →∞ T
t=0 i∈I
(9)
s. t. (4), (5), (6), (7), ∀t,

min

lim

where the expectation of G(·) is taken over all sources of
randomness.
The SINR constraints in (4) can be rewritten into convex
second-order cone (SOC) constraints through proper rearrangement [13]; that is,
sX
1
2
2
|hH
Re{hH
k,t wk (t)},
k,t wl (t)| + σk ≤ √
γk
(10)
l6=k
Im{hH
k,t wk (t)} = 0, ∀k.

Although (9) is convex based on (8) and (10), it is difficult
to solve since the minimization of average total cost is over the
infinite time horizon. Particularly, the (dis)charging operations
are coupled across time through the battery level changes. The
decision at current slot can affect the decisions further down
into the future.
By recognizing that (5) can be interpreted as an energy
queue recursion, we apply the time decoupling technique to

Algorithm 1 Two-Way Energy Trading (TWET)
1: Initialization: Select Γ and V , and introduce a virtual
queue Qi (0) := Ci (0) + Γ, ∀i.
2: Energy trading and beamforming: At every slot t, ob∗
serve a realization ξt , and decide {wk∗ (t), ∀k; Pb,i
(t), ∀i}
by solving (12). The BSs perform two-way energy trading
with the main grid and coordinated beamforming based on
∗
{wk∗ (t), ∀k; Pb,i
(t), ∀i}.
3: Queue updates: Per slot t, (dis)charge the battery based
∗
on {Pb,i
(t), ∀i}, so that the stored energy Ci (t + 1) =
∗
Ci (t) + Pb,i
(t), ∀i; and update the virtual queues Qi (t +
1) := Ci (t + 1) + Γ, ∀i.
turn (9) into a tractable form [14]. Over the infinite time
horizon, (5) can be replaced by
T −1
1 X
E[Pb,i (t)] = 0, ∀i.
T →∞ T
t=0

lim

(11)

We can then resort to the Lyapunov optimization method
[15] to achieve asymptotically optimal solution for (9). Introducing two critical parameters, namely a “queue perturbation”
parameter Γ and a weight parameter V , the problem to be
solved becomes

X
min
V G(Pg,i (t), Pb,i (t))+Qi (t)Pb,i (t)
{wk (t),Pb,i (t)}

i∈I

s. t. (6), (7), (10),

(12)

where we define a virtual queue Qi (t) := Ci (t) + Γ, ∀i, t.
Given that G(·) is convex and increasing, G(Pg,i (t), Pb,i (t))
is jointly convex in (wk (t), Pb,i (t)) [16, Sec. 3.2.4]. It readily
follows that (12) is a convex optimization problem, and can be
solved via off-the-shelf solvers, as summarized in Algorithm 1.
IV. M ULTI -T IMESCALE MTEP
A more general case of energy trading between 5G and
smart grid can involve multiple timescales of real-time wireless transmission, energy harvesting, and short-term/long-term
energy pricing, as discussed earlier. Long-term energy buying prices are lower than real-time prices on average. This
discrepancy can be further exploited to reduce the energy
cost of 5G, as compared to TWET. To this end, MTEP is
expected to plan energy usage and purchase ahead-of-time
over multiple timescales. For illustration convenience, here
we consider two different timescales, i.e., real-time for a
short slot and ahead-of-time for a long interval. The wireless
transmission is synchronized with the real-time energy pricing,
while the output of energy harvesting is synchronized with the
ahead-of-time energy pricing.
At the beginning of each “coarse-grained” interval, namely
at time t = nT , n = 1, 2, . . ., Ai,n denotes the RES amount
collected per BS i ∈ I, and An := [A1 [n], . . . , AI [n]]′ . Given
An , the central controller decides the energy amount Ei [n] to
be used in the next T slots per BS i, i.e., the grid supplies an
average energy amount of Ei [n]/T per slot t = nT, . . . , (n +

1)T −1. Given Ei [n] and Ai [n], the shortage energy purchased
from the grid for BS i is max{Ei [n]−Ai [n], 0}; or the surplus
energy sold to the grid is max{Ai [n] − Ei [n], 0}. BS i either
buys energy from the grid at the ahead-of-time price αlt
n , or
lt
sells energy to the grid at price βnlt . We set αlt
>
β
to
avoid
n
n
meaningless buy-and-sell activities. The ahead-of-time energy
transaction cost of BS i is therefore given by

Ai (t) = EiT[nt ] in (12). The other subproblem is ahead-of-time
energy planning of the optimal Ei∗ [n], as given by

lt
Glt (Ei [n]) := max{αlt
n (Ei [n]−Ai [n]), βn (Ai [n]−Ei [n])}.
(13)
lt
Let ξnlt := {αlt
n , βn , An , ∀n} collect all the random variables
evolving at this slow timescale.
With nt := ⌊ Tt ⌋, the real-time energy buying and selling
Ei [nt ]
rt
prices αrt
t and βt , and Ai (t) in (8) substituted by
T , the
real-time energy transaction cost of BS i is given by

s. t. (6), (7), (10), ∀t = τ, . . . , τ + T − 1

min

{Ei [n]}

rt
Let ξtrt := {αrt
t , βt , Ht , ∀t} collect all the random variables
evolving at this fast timescale.
According to (13) and (14), we can define the energy
transaction cost for BS i per slot t as:

Φi (t) :=

1 lt
G (Ei [nt ]) + Grt (Ei [nt ], Pg,i (t), Pb,i (t)). (15)
T

τ +T
X−1

Qi (τ )E{Pb,i (t)}

t=τ

o

(17)

where the expectations are taken over ξtrt .
Next we develop an efficient solver of (17). Suppose that
ξtrt is i.i.d. across time slots. We can suppress t from all
optimization variables, and rewrite (17) as (with short-hand
notation Qi [n] := Qi (nT ))

{Ei [n]}

(14)

t=τ

i∈I


Pg,i (t), Pb,i (t))} +

min


Grt (Ei [nt ], Pg,i (t), Pb,i (t)) := max αrt
t [Pg,i (t)
E
[n
]
Ei [nt ]
i t
+ Pb,i (t)], βtrt [
− Pg,i (t) − Pb,i (t)]
−
T
T

τ +T
Xn 
X−1
V Glt (Ei [n]) +
E{Grt (Ei [n],

X
i∈I

{V Glt (Ei [n]) + T E[V Grt (Ei [n], Pg,i (ξtrt ), Pb,i (ξtrt ))

+ Qi [n]Pb,i (ξtrt )]}
sX
1
rt
rt 2
2
|hH
Re{hH
s. t.
k wk (ξt )},
k wl (ξt )| + σk ≤ √
γk
l6=k

rt
rt
Im{hH
k wk (ξt )} = 0, ∀k, ξt

Pbmin
Pc +

Pb,i (ξtrt )

≤
X

k∈K

≤

Pbmax ,

(18a)

∀i, ξtrt

wkH (ξtrt )Bi wk (ξtrt )

≤

Pgmax ,

(18b)
∀i, ξtrt ,

(18c)

which can be further reformulated as an unconstrained optimization problem with respect to Ei [n], as given by

i
Xh
Let X := {Ei [n], ∀i, n; Pb,i (t), Ci (t), ∀i, t; wk (t), ∀k, t}. The
min
V Glt (Ei [n]) + T Ḡrt ({Ei [n]}) ,
(19)
{Ei [n]}
goal is to design an online energy management scheme that
i∈I
decides the ahead-of-time energy-trading amounts {Ei [n], ∀i}
at every t = nT , battery (dis)charging amounts {Pb,i (t), ∀i}, where we define
X 
and the CoMP beamforming vectors {wk (t), ∀k} per slot t, so
rt
min
E V Ψrt(Ei [n], Pb,i (ξtrt ), wk (ξtrt ))
as to minimize the total time-average energy cost. The problem Ḡ ({Ei [n]}):={Pi ,P
b,i ,wk}
i∈I
of MTEP is to find

+Qi [n]Pb,i (ξtrt ) s. t. (18a), (18b), (18c)
(20)
NX
T −1 X
1
E{Φi (t)}
Φ∗ := min lim
X N →∞ N T
(16) with the compact notation Ψrt (Ei [n], wk (ξtrt ), Pb,i (ξtrt )) :=
t=0 i∈I
Grt (Ei [n], Pg,i (ξtrt ), Pb,i (ξtrt )).
subject to (5), (6), (7), (10), ∀t
Since E[V Ψrt (Ei [n], wk (ξtrt ), Pb,i (ξtrt ))+Qi [n]Pb,i (ξtrt )] is
jointly convex in (Ei , wk , Pb,i ), then the minimization over
where Φ∗ is the optimal solution, and the expectations of Φi (t) (w , P ) is within a convex set; thus, (18a)-(18c) are convex
k
b,i
are taken over all sources of randomness.
with respect to Ei [n] [16, Sec. 3.2.5]. Hence, (19) is generally
We can generalize the Lyapunov optimization techniques a nonsmooth and unconstrained convex problem, and can be
to achieve the asymptotically optimal solution for (16). Both solved using the stochastic subgradient method.
ahead-of-time and real-time decisions on energy trading can be
The subgradient of Glt (Ei [n]) can be written as
accommodated. This consists of multiple asynchronous Lya
lt

punov optimization processes running at different timescales.
αn , if Ei [n] > Ai [n];
∂Glt (Ei [n]) = βnlt , if Ei [n] < Ai [n];
Problem (16) can be decoupled into two subproblems. One


is real-time energy trading and beamforming at each fineany x ∈ [βnlt , αlt
n ], if Ei [n] = Ai [n].
grained time slot within a coarse-grained interval n, given
E
(ξtrt )} for (20), the
the energy plan made at the beginning of the interval Ei [n]. With the optimal solution {wkE (ξtrt ), Pb,i
rt
Since (16) recedes to (9), we can just run Algorithm 1 with partial subgradient of Ḡ ({Ei [n]}) with respect to Ei [n]

Algorithm 2 Multi-Timescale Energy Planning (MTEP)
1: Initialization: Select Γ and V , and introduce a virtual
queue Qi (0) := Ci (0) + Γ, ∀i.
2: Ahead-of-time energy planning: Per interval τ = nT ,
observe a realization ξnlt , and determine the energy
amounts {Ei∗ [n], ∀i} by solving (17). Then the BSs trade
energy with the main grid based on {Ei∗ [n], ∀i}, and
request the grid to supply an average amount Ei∗ [n]/T
per slot t = τ, . . . , τ + T − 1.
3: Energy trading and beamforming: Run Algorithm 1
with Ai (t) = EiT[nt ] in (12).
4: Queue updates: Per slot t, (dis)charge the battery based
∗
on {Pb,i
(t), ∀i}, so that the stored energy Ci (t + 1) =
∗
Ci (t) + Pb,i
(t), ∀i; and update the virtual queues Qi (t +
1) := Ci (t + 1) + Γ, ∀i.
E
(ξtrt ))},
is ∂i Ḡrt ({Ei [n]}) = V E{∂Ψrt (Ei [n], wkE (ξtrt ), Pb,i
where
 −β rt
Ei [n]
t

 T rt , if T > ∆;
E
Ei [n]
t
∂Ψrt (Ei [n], wkE (ξtrt ), Pb,i
(ξtrt )) = −α
< ∆;
T , if
T


−αrt
−βtrt
t
x ∈ [ T , T ], else,

P
H
E
and ∆ := Pc + k wkE (ξtrt )Bi wkE (ξtrt ) + Pb,i
(ξtrt ).
rt
lt
Let g¯i (Ei ) := V ∂G (Ei ) + T ∂i Ḡ ({Ei }). The subgradient descent iteration can be employed to find the optimal
Ei∗ [n] for (19), as
(j+1)

Ei

(j)

(j)

[n] = [Ei [n] − µ(j) ḡi (Ei [n])]+ ,

∀i

(21)

where j denotes iteration index, and {µ(j) } collects stepsizes.
Since the distribution of ξtrt is unknown a priori, a stochastic
subgradient approach is derived based on the past realizations
{ξτrt , τ = 0, 1, . . . , nT − 1}. We can randomly draw a realization ξτrt from past realizations, and run the following iteration
(j+1)

Ei

(j)

(j)

[n] = [Ei [n] − µ(j) gi (Ei [n])]+ ,

∀i

(j)

(j)

(j)

(22)

where gi (Ei [n]) := V (∂Glt (Ei [n]) + T ∂Ψrt(Ei [n],
E
E
(ξτrt )} obtained by
(ξτrt ))) with {wkE (ξτrt ), Pb,i
wkE (ξτrt ), Pb,i
(j)
solving a convex problem (20) with Ei [n] = Ei [n]. The
iteration (22) can asymptotically converge to the optimal
{Ei∗ [n], ∀i} as j → ∞ [16].
The proposed MTEP is presented in Algorithm 2.
V. A SYMPTOTIC O PTIMALITY

OF

TWET AND MTEP

The asymptotic optimality of the proposed Algorithms 1 and
2 can be established through the following theorems.
min
Theorem 1 [17]. If we set Q0i = Ci0 − V ᾱ + Pb,i
−
min
max
Ci , ∀i, and select a V ≤ V
, then the TWET algorithm
yields a feasible dynamic control scheme for (9), which is
asymptotically optimal in the sense that
T −1
1 XX
M1
E[Ĝ(t)] ≤ G∗ +
T →∞ T
V
t=0

G∗ ≤ lim

i∈I

where Ĝ(t) denotes the resultant cost under the proposed
TWET algorithm;
max{αt , ∀t}, β := min{βt , ∀t},
P ᾱ := max
min 2
M1 := 12 i (max{Pb,i
, −Pb,i
}) , and V max :=
max
min
min
max
mini {Ci
− Ci + Pb,i − Pb,i }/(ᾱ − β).
min
Theorem 2 [18]. If we set Q0i = Ci0 − V ᾱ + T Pb,i
−
Cimin , ∀i, and select a V ≤ V max , Then the proposed MTEP
yields a feasible dynamic control scheme for (16), which is
asymptotically near-optimal in the sense that
N T −1
M2
1 X X
E[Φ̂i (t)] ≤ Φ∗ +
N →∞ N T
V
t=0

Φ∗ ≤ lim

i∈I

where Φ̂i (t) denotes the resultant cost under the proposed MTEP algorithm; ᾱ := max{αrt
:=
t , ∀t}, β
P
T
max
min 2
rt
min{βt , ∀t}, M2 := 2 i (max{Pb,i , −Pb,i }) , and
min
max
V max := mini {Cimax − Cimin + T (Pb,i
− Pb,i
)}/(ᾱ − β).
Clearly, Algorithms 1 and 2 provide solutions as close to
the optimum G∗ or Φ∗ as possible, if we have very small price
difference (ᾱ − β) or very large battery capacities {Cimax }i .
VI. N UMERICAL T ESTS
Comparison studies are conducted between Algorithms 1
and 2, as well as an offline scheme [19] to benchmark their
performances. Note that the offline benchmark is an ideal
scheme with a-priori knowledge of future channel states,
energy prices and RES arrivals. We also simulate a heuristic
algorithm (Heu) that minimizes the instantaneous energy cost
per slot without battery (dis)charging.
We considered two BSs, each with two transmit antennas, to
serve three single-antenna mobile users. The system bandwidth
is 1 MHz. For simplicity, we randomly generate the channel
coefficients as zero-mean complex-Gaussian random variables
max
min
with unit variance. We set Pb,i
= 2 kWh, Pb,i
= −2 kWh,
max
min
Ci
= 60 kWh, and Ci
= 0. The SINR requirement
is γkreq = 5 dB for all users (unless otherwise specified). A
coarse-grained interval consists of T = 5 time slots. The
rt
ahead-of-time and real-time energy buying prices αlt
n and αt
lt
follow folded normal distributions with E{αn } = $1.5/kWh
and E{αrt
t } = $2.3/kWh. The corresponding selling prices
rt
rt
are βnlt = 0.9 × αlt
n and βt = 0.3 × αt . The harvested energy
Ai [n] also yield from a folded normal distribution, with an
average rate of 1.6 kWh/slot.
The average transaction costs of the four algorithms are
depicted under different battery capacities Cimax in Fig. 2.
Clearly, the growth of Cimax from 40 to 120 has no impact on
the average costs of the offline scheme and the Heu, but causes
the other two to monotonically decrease. In particular, reductions of 42% and 58% can be achieved using Algorithms 1
and 2 when Cimax = 120 kWh, respectively, as compared to
the Heu. Algorithm 2 always outperforms Algorithm 1 and
the Heu, since Algorithm 2 is able to take advantage of multitimescale energy pricing, while Algorithm 1 can only work
with real-time prices. The Heu without battery (dis)charging
has to purchase much more expensive energy from the realtime energy market, thus resulting in the highest transaction
cost.

70

Algorithm 1
Algorithm 2
Offline
Heu

55
60

50

Average cost ($)

40

Average cost ($)

Algorithm 1
Algorithm 2
Offline
Heu

45

35
30
25
20

50

40

30

20

15
10
40

10
50

60

70

80
max

C

90

100

110

120

1

Fig. 2. Average energy transaction cost versus battery capacity

Cimax .

100

Algorithm 1
Algorithm 2
Offline
Heu

90

Average cost ($)

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10

0

5

10

15

1.5

2

2.5

Energy harvesting rate (kWh/slot)

(kWh)

20

25

30

SINR requirment (dB)

Fig. 3. Average energy transaction cost versus SINR requirements.

Fig. 3 compares the average energy costs of the four
algorithms under different SINR requirements γkreq . It can be
seen that all the average costs increase with the growth of
req
γk (which represents more strict SINR requirements). Again,
Algorithm 2 outperforms Algorithm 1 and the Heu, incurring
a cost closest to the offline benchmark, given the same SINR
requirement. However, note that the optimal offline counterpart
cannot work in practice due to the lack of future stochastic
system information.
Fig. 4 plots the average energy costs against the energy
harvesting rate (in kWh/slot). We can see that the costs decline
linearly with the growth of energy harvesting capability. Also,
it can be observed that the gap between Algorithm 2 and
the offline benchmark remains almost unchanged; while that
between Algorithms 1 and 2 decreases as the energy harvesting
rate increases. We can conclude that the long-term energy
planning in MTEP is particularly effective to the systems with
limited energy harvesting capability.
VII. C ONCLUSION
In this article, we present a new framework of TWET and
MTEP, where Lyapunov optimization techniques are exploited
to capture the temporal and spatial randomnesses of both 5G
and smart grid in terms of energy price, RES, and wireless
channel. Simulation results show that effective MTEP is able
to save 58% of the energy cost of 5G.
R EFERENCES
[1] M. Agiwal, A. Roy, and N. Saxena, “Next generation 5g wireless
networks: A comprehensive survey,” IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts.,
vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1617–1655, 2016.

Fig. 4. Average energy transaction cost versus energy harvesting rate.
[2] X. Fang, S. Misra, G. Xue, and D. Yang, “Smart grid the new and
improved power grid: A survey,” IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 14,
no. 4, pp. 944–980, 2012.
[3] D. Li, W. Saad, I. Guvenc, A. Mehbodniya, and F. Adachi, “Decentralized energy allocation for wireless networks with renewable energy
powered base stations,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 63, no. 6, pp. 2126–
2142, 2015.
[4] T. Han and N. Ansari, “Powering mobile networks with green energy,”
IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 90–96, 2014.
[5] X. Wang and Z. Li, “Energy-efficient transmissions of bursty data
packets with strict deadlines over time-varying wireless channels,” IEEE
Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 2533–2543, 2013.
[6] Z. Nan, X. Wang, and W. Ni, “Energy-efficient transmission of delaylimited bursty data packets under non-ideal circuit power consumption,”
in Proc. ICC, 2014, pp. 4957–4962.
[7] Z. Nan, T. Chen, X. Wang, and W. Ni, “Energy-efficient transmission
schedule for delay-limited bursty data arrivals under nonideal circuit
power consumption,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Tech., vol. 65, no. 8, pp. 6588–
6600, 2014.
[8] X. Chen, W. Ni, X. Wang, and Y. Sun, “Provisioning quality-of-service
to energy harvesting wireless communications,” IEEE Commun. Mag.,
vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 102–109, 2015.
[9] X. Chen, X. Wang, and X. Zhou, “Energy-harvesting powered transmissions of delay-limited data packets,” in Proc. Globecom, 2015, pp.
2550–2555.
[10] R. Irmer, H. Droste, P. Marsch, M. Grieger, G. Fettweis, S. Brueck, H. P.
Mayer, L. Thiele, and V. Jungnickel, “Coordinated multipoint: Concepts,
performance, and field trial results,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 49, no. 2,
pp. 102–111, 2011.
[11] X. Lyu, W. Ni, H. Tian, R. P. Liu, X. Wang, G. B. Giannakis, and
A. Paulraj, “Optimal schedule of mobile edge computing for Internet
of Things using partial information,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun.,
accepted, 2017.
[12] C. Qin, W. Ni, H. Tian, R. P. Liu, and Y. J. Guo, “Joint beamforming
and user selection in multiuser collaborative MIMO SWIPT systems
with non-negligible circuit energy consumption,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Tech.,
accepted, 2017.
[13] A. Wiesel, Y. C. Eldar, and S. Shamai, “Linear precoding via conic
optimization for fixed MIMO receivers,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process.,
vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 161–176, 2005.
[14] R. Urgaonkar, B. Urgaonkar, M. J. Neely, and A. Sivasubramaniam,
“Optimal power cost management using stored energy in data centers,”
in Proc. of ACM SIGMETRICS, 2011, pp. 221–232.
[15] M. J. Neely, “Stochastic network optimization with application to
communication and queueing systems,” Synthesis Lectures on Communication Networks, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–211, 2010.
[16] S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe, Convex Optimization.
Cambridge
University Press, 2004.
[17] X. Wang, Y. Zhang, T. Chen, and G. B. Giannakis, “Dynamic energy
management for smart-grid-powered coordinated multipoint systems,”
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 1348–1359, May 2016.
[18] X. Wang, X. Chen, T. Chen, L. Huang, and G. B. Giannakis, “Two-scale
stochastic control for integrated multipoint communication systems with
renewables,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, to appear, 2017.
[19] X. Wang, Y. Zhang, G. B. Giannakis, and S. Hu, “Robust smartgrid-powered cooperative multipoint systems,” IEEE Trans. Wireless
Commun., vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 6188–6199, 2015.

