Journal cover Journal topic
Advances in Geosciences An open-access journal for refereed proceedings and special publications
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • CiteScore value: 1.02 CiteScore 1.02
  • SNIP value: 0.614 SNIP 0.614
  • SJR value: 0.435 SJR 0.435
  • IPP value: 0.97 IPP 0.97
  • h5-index value: 11 h5-index 11
  • Scimago H index value: 32 Scimago H index 32
Volume 18 | Copyright
Adv. Geosci., 18, 15-23, 2008
https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-18-15-2008
© Author(s) 2008. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

  20 Jun 2008

20 Jun 2008

A global comparison of four potential evapotranspiration equations and their relevance to stream flow modelling in semi-arid environments

M. Weiß and L. Menzel M. Weiß and L. Menzel
  • Center for Environmental Systems Research, University of Kassel, Kurt-Wolters-Str. 3, 34109 Kassel, Germany

Abstract. This study compares four different potential evapotranspiration equations according to Priestley Taylor, Kimberly Penman, Penman Monteith (FAO-56) and Hargreaves on a global basis to demonstrate their difference, and assess their impact on the calculation of stream flows. The various equations of potential evapotranspiration show great differences in magnitude. But due to the limited availability of validation data, it is difficult to assess which method is the physically most reasonable to be applied. According to this study, the radiation-based Priestley Taylor equation proved to be most suitable for a global application. For the calculation of stream flows, however, the processes involved in the derivation of actual evapotranspiration values from potential evapotranspiration values appear more relevant than the absolute value of the potential evapotranspiration itself.

Download & links
Download
Citation
Share