EGU24-623, updated on 08 Mar 2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-623
EGU General Assembly 2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Sensitivity of Evapotranspiration, Total Water Storage Change and Discharge to different Potential Evapotranspiration Methods
- 1Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Praha-Suchdol 16500, Czech Republic
- 2Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research GmbH - UFZ, CHS, Germany
Hydrological models are effective tools for understanding and quantifying changes in water
availability over time. These models excel in quantifying various hydrological components such
as runoff (Q), total water storage (TWS), evapotranspiration (ET) . Precipitation (P) and Po-
tential Evapotranspiration (PET) are the most important required inputs for modeling these
components. In modeling, sensitivity of P is well-acknowledged. However, a notable gap exists
in assessing the sensitivity of PET methods in hydrological models. This study systematically
examines the sensitivity in terms of slopes, of 12 distinct PET methods spanning different
classes (temperature-based, radiation-based and their combinations) on ET, total water stor-
age change (TWSC) and Q. More than 100 European catchments were studied using mesoscale
Hydrological Model (mHM). Our results show that PET methods differ significantly at annual
and seasonal scales. For instance, overall annual PET ranges from approximately 250-2200
mm/year across European catchments. PET increases from energy-limited to water-limited
catchments. Temperature-based PET methods is higher in magnitude than radiation and com-
binational type at summer, spring-season, and annual scale. No clear pattern was observed for
the winter and autumn season. We also examined ET, Q, and TWSC slopes and compared
them with PET’s slopes. Our study illuminates the pivotal role of PET methods in hydrological
modeling, emphasizing the need for researchers to select PET methods judiciously according
to the specific objectives of their studies.
availability over time. These models excel in quantifying various hydrological components such
as runoff (Q), total water storage (TWS), evapotranspiration (ET) . Precipitation (P) and Po-
tential Evapotranspiration (PET) are the most important required inputs for modeling these
components. In modeling, sensitivity of P is well-acknowledged. However, a notable gap exists
in assessing the sensitivity of PET methods in hydrological models. This study systematically
examines the sensitivity in terms of slopes, of 12 distinct PET methods spanning different
classes (temperature-based, radiation-based and their combinations) on ET, total water stor-
age change (TWSC) and Q. More than 100 European catchments were studied using mesoscale
Hydrological Model (mHM). Our results show that PET methods differ significantly at annual
and seasonal scales. For instance, overall annual PET ranges from approximately 250-2200
mm/year across European catchments. PET increases from energy-limited to water-limited
catchments. Temperature-based PET methods is higher in magnitude than radiation and com-
binational type at summer, spring-season, and annual scale. No clear pattern was observed for
the winter and autumn season. We also examined ET, Q, and TWSC slopes and compared
them with PET’s slopes. Our study illuminates the pivotal role of PET methods in hydrological
modeling, emphasizing the need for researchers to select PET methods judiciously according
to the specific objectives of their studies.
How to cite: Thakur, V., Rakovec, O., Kumar, R., and Markonis, Y.: Sensitivity of Evapotranspiration, Total Water Storage Change and Discharge to different Potential Evapotranspiration Methods, EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-623, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-623, 2024.
