Estimation of evaporation from open water - A review of selected studies, summary of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers data collection and methods, and evaluation of two methods for estimation of evaporation from five reservoirs in Texas

Abstract

Organizations responsible for the management of water resources, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), are tasked with estimation of evaporation for waterbudgeting and planning purposes. The USACE has historically used Class A pan evaporation data (pan data) to estimate evaporation from reservoirs but many USACE Districts have been experimenting with other techniques for an alternative to collecting pan data. The energy-budget method generally is considered the preferred method for accurate estimation of open-water evaporation from lakes and reservoirs. Complex equations to estimate evaporation, such as the Penman, DeBruin-Keijman, and Priestley-Taylor, perform well when compared with energy-budget method estimates when all of the important energy terms are included in the equations and ideal data are collected. However, sometimes nonideal data are collected and energy terms, such as the change in the amount of stored energy and advected energy, are not included in the equations. When this is done, the corresponding errors in evaporation estimates are not quantifiable. Much simpler methods, such as the Hamon method and a method developed by the U.S. Weather Bureau (USWB) (renamed the National Weather Service in 1970), have been shown to provide reasonable estimates of evaporation when compared to energybudget method estimates. Data requirements for the Hamon and USWB methods are minimal and sometimes perform well with remotely collected data. The Hamon method requires average daily air temperature, and the USWB method requires daily averages of air temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, and solar radiation. Estimates of annual lake evaporation from pan data are frequently within 20 percent of energy-budget method estimates. Results of evaporation estimates from the Hamon method and the USWB method were compared against historical pan data at five selected reservoirs in Texas (Benbrook Lake, Canyon Lake, Granger Lake, Hords Creek Lake, and Sam Rayburn Lake) to evaluate their performance and to develop coefficients to minimize bias for the purpose of estimating reservoir evaporation with accuracies similar to estimates of evaporation obtained from pan data. The modified Hamon method estimates of reservoir evaporation were similar to estimates of reservoir evaporation from pan data for daily, monthly, and annual time periods. The modified Hamon method estimates of annual reservoir evaporation were always within 20 percent of annual reservoir evaporation from pan data. Unmodified and modified USWB method estimates of annual reservoir evaporation were within 20 percent of annual reservoir evaporation from pan data for about 91 percent of the years compared. Average daily differences between modified USWB method estimates and estimates from pan data as a percentage of the average amount of daily evaporation from pan data were within 20 percent for 98 percent of the months. Without any modification to the USWB method, average daily differences as a percentage of the average amount of daily evaporation f...

Quantifying the potential for reservoirs to secure future surface water yields in the world’s largest river basins

“…Similarly, net evaporative loss from the reservoir is forced by climate input from the GCM using the general approach of Shuttleworth (1993) (appendix A section 2). This approach originated from the Penman equation (Penman 1948) and is widely used to estimate the potential evaporation of open water and fully-saturated land surfaces (Harwell 2012). Net evaporation is therefore the difference between estimated potential evaporation from reservoir surface and precipitation on reservoir surface.…”

Evaluating Evaporation Methods for Estimating Small Reservoir Water Surface Evaporation in the Brazilian Savannah

“…Alternative methods have been used to surpass some of the pan method's restrictions [18]. The Penman (1948) [19] method is one of the most used and reliable methods for estimating reservoir evaporation [20], but its application is difficult in many regions due to the lack of climatic data.…”

Sustainable and efficient water use: from water footprint accounting to setting targets

“…Typically, the straightforward Kohli and Frenken method gives the highest evaporation estimates (especially in warm A climates). The Hamon method yields the lowest estimates, which was anticipated by previous studies by Harwell (2012) and Majidi et al (2015). The Jensen-Haise method estimates higher evaporation rates in equatorial climates compared to other methods, possibly because the Jensen-Haise method was originally developed for more A regions (Jensen & Haise, 1963).…”

“…These 2,235 reservoirs cover a maximum surface area of 129,000 km 2 (~50% of total GRanD database surface area of manmade reservoirs). Hamon (1961) and a modified version of Penman (Kohler et al, 1955;Harwell, 2012). The Kohli and Frenken (KF) method is straightforward:…”

“…The modified Penman (P) method combines mass transfer and energy budget methods, which expels the need for the surface water temperature, to determine open water evaporation (Harwell, 2012;Majidi et al, 2015):…”