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

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.