Comparison of Empirical ETo Relationships with ERA5-Land and In Situ Data in Greece

Abstract

Reference evapotranspiration (ETo) estimation is essential for water resources management. The present research compares four different ETo estimators based on reanalysis data (ERA5-Land) and in situ observations from three different cultivation sites in Greece. ETo based on FAO56-Penman–Monteith (FAO-PM) is compared to ETo calculated from the empirical methods of Copais, Valiantzas and Hargreaves-Samani using both reanalysis and in situ data. The daily and monthly biases of each method are calculated against the FAO56-PM method. ERA5-Land data are also compared to ground-truth observations. Additionally, a sensitivity analysis is conducted on each site for different cultivation periods. The present research finds that the use of ERA5-Land data underestimates ground-truth-based ETo by 35%, approximately, when using the FAO56-PM method. Additionally, the use of other methodologies also shows underestimation of ETo when calculated with ERA5-Land data. On the contrary, the use of the Valiantzas and Copais methodologies with in situ observations shows overestimation of ETo when compared to FAO56-PM, in the ranges of 32–62% and 24–56%, respectively. The sensitivity analysis concludes that solar radiation and relative humidity are the most sensitive variables of the Copais and Valiantzas methodologies. Overall, the Hargreaves-Samani methodology was found to be the most efficient tool for ETo estimation. Finally, the evaluation of the ERA5-Land data showed that only air temperature inputs can be utilized with high levels of confidence.