Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Monthly estimated potential evapotranspiration and measured pan evaporation for two locations in Hawaii, Hilo and Pahala. Potential evapotranspiration is usually measured indirectly, from other climatic factors, but also depends on the surface type, such as free water (for lakes and oceans), the soil type for bare soil, and also the density and diversity of vegetation.
Evapotranspiration can never be greater than potential evapotranspiration, but can be lower if there is not enough water to be evaporated or plants are unable to transpire maturely and readily. Some US states utilize a full cover alfalfa reference crop that is 0.5 m (1.6 ft) in height, rather than the general short green grass reference, due to ...
Potential evapotranspiration (PET), is the evaporation and transpiration that potentially could occur if a field of the crop had an ideal unlimited water supply. RET is the reference ET often denoted as ET 0 .
Specifically the Penman–Monteith equation refines weather based potential evapotranspiration (PET) estimates of vegetated land areas. [1] It is widely regarded as one of the most accurate models, in terms of estimates. [citation needed] The original equation was developed by Howard Penman at the Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, UK.
The Penman-Monteith equation approximates net evapotranspiration (ET) from meteorological data as a replacement for direct measurement of evapotranspiration. The equation is widely used, and was derived by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization for modeling reference evapotranspiration ET 0 .
Drier surroundings give a steeper water potential gradient, and so increase the rate of transpiration. Wind: In still air, water lost due to transpiration can accumulate in the form of vapor close to the leaf surface. This will reduce the rate of water loss, as the water potential gradient from inside to outside of the leaf is then slightly less.
Given the limited data input to the equation, the calculated evapotranspiration should be regarded as only broadly accurate. Rather than a precise measure of evapotranspiration, the output of the equation is better thought of as providing an order of magnitude. [2] The inaccuracy of the equation is exacerbated by extreme variants of weather.
In 1948, C. W. Thornthwaite proposed an AI defined as: = where the water deficiency is calculated as the sum of the monthly differences between precipitation and potential evapotranspiration for those months when the normal precipitation is less than the normal evapotranspiration; and where stands for the sum of monthly values of potential evapotranspiration for the deficient months (after ...