A one-layer resistance model for estimating regional evapotranspiration using remote sensing data

A methodology has been developed for estimating regional evapotranspiration using remote sensing data. The transfer of sensible and latent heat is described by an aerodynamic resistance and a surface resistance. The aerodynamic resistance is formulated on the basis of the Monin-Obukhov similarity th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Agricultural and forest meteorology 1995-12, Vol.77 (3), p.241-261
Hauptverfasser: Zhang, Lu, Lemeur, R., Goutorbe, J.P.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:A methodology has been developed for estimating regional evapotranspiration using remote sensing data. The transfer of sensible and latent heat is described by an aerodynamic resistance and a surface resistance. The aerodynamic resistance is formulated on the basis of the Monin-Obukhov similarity theory and the surface resistance is determined from the energy balance equation using remotely sensed surface temperature. The regional evapotranspiration is then calculated with a one-layer resistance model. The overall surface transfer characteristics at regional scale are characterized by an effective roughness length and this parameter was determined from local roughness length with the aid of remote sensing measurements. The model was validated by using the data obtained during the HAPEX-MOBILHY (Hydrologic Atmospheric Pilot Experiment and Modelisation du Bilan Hydrique) experiment. At local scale with homogeneous surface conditions, good agreement ( r = 0.90, RMSE = 50 W m −2) was obtained between model estimates and the measurements at ground stations. The regional evapotranspiration from the agricultural part of the HAPEX-MOBILHY was also calculated with the one-layer resistance model by combining the NOAA-AVHRR with ground-based meteorological data. The calculated regional evapotranspiration was compared with the area averages of the evapotranspiration measured by the ground-based stations. The two techniques agreed fairly well and the average difference was only 28 W m −2.
ISSN:0168-1923
1873-2240
DOI:10.1016/0168-1923(95)02264-X