Abstract
The evaporation of water, measured using evaporation pans, has been decreasing in the past few decades over large areas with different climates. The common interpretation is that the trend is related to increasing cloudiness, and that it provides an indication of decreasing potential evaporation and a decreasing terrestrial evaporation component in the hydrologic cycle. Here we show that, although these studies are valuable, pan evaporation has not been used correctly as an indicator of climate change.
Main
At first glance, reports of decreasing pan evaporation in European Russia, Siberia and the western and eastern United States1, India2 and Venezuela3 are paradoxical. They are hard to reconcile with well-substantiated increases in global precipitation and cloudiness4, which would normally require more surface evaporation as the only source of atmospheric water vapour, rather than less. They also run counter to predictions of increasing evaporation5, as one of the more robust outcomes of radiative forcing, resulting from increasing atmospheric CO2in global circulation model calculations.
We resolve this paradox by demonstrating that, in non-humid environments, measured pan evaporation is not a good measure of potential evaporation; moreover, in many situations, decreasing pan evaporation actually provides a strong indication of increasing terrestrial evaporation.
The evaporation from a pan, E pa, can be used as a good indicator of the evaporation, E, from the surrounding environment, but only when land-surface moisture is in ample supply; this normally involves multiplication by a ‘pan coefficient’ a of order one, depending mainly on pan type6. The evaporation from any large uniform land surface, with adequate moisture so available energy is the limiting factor, is usually referred to as potential evaporation, E 0. The actual evaporation from a well-watered surface is E =E 0=aE pa. Whenever the land-surface moisture becomes limiting and insufficient to sustain E 0, the actual evaporation, E, decreases below E 0and the energy not used up by E manifests itself as an increase in sensible heat flux ΔH, such that E =E 0- ΔH. This in turn causes aE pato exceed E 0, or aE pa=E 0+b ΔH, where b is another coefficient slightly larger than one, again depending mainly on pan type. Now aE pano longer provides a direct measure of E 0, so it is more appropriately called ‘apparent’ potential evaporation.
The main point is that E and E paexhibit complementary rather than proportional behaviour; indeed, for instance in the extreme case of a desert environment, E is zero, whereas E pais at its maximum. The idea of a complementary relationship between actual evaporation and apparent potential evaporation is not new7, and it has stimulated advances in the estimation of terrestrial evaporation8,10. In the case of a pan filled with water and placed in a region with less than adequate ground wetness to sustain E 0, elimination of ΔH in the above yields E =[(1+b)E 0- aE pa]/b.
Because a and b are of order one, this equation indicates how the observed1,3 decreases in pan evaporation, E pa, can be interpreted as evidence for increasing terrestrial evaporation, E, in those regions. This is consistent with data4,11 indicating an intensifying hydrologic cycle in large regions: increasing precipitation leads to increasing surface run-off and soil wetness, which in turn generates more evaporation, and so on.
References
Peterson, T. C., Golubev, V. S. & Groisman, P. Y. Nature 377, 687–688 (1995).
Chattopadhyay, N. & Hulme, M. Agric. Forest. Meteorol. 87, 55–73 (1997).
Quintana-Gomez, R. A. Proc. 7th International Meeting on Statistical Climatology, 25-29 May 1997 (Whisler, BC, Canada, 1998).
Karl, T. R., Knight, R. W., Easterling, D. R. & Quayle, R. G. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 77, 279–292 (1996).
Manabe, S. Ambio 26, 47–51 (1997).
Brutsaert, W. Evaporation into the Atmosphere (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1982).
Bouchet, R. J. Int. Assoc. Sci. Hydrol. Pub. 62, 134–142 (1963).
Morton, F. I. J. Hydraul. Div. ASCE 102, 275–291 (1976).
Brutsaert, W. & Stricker, H. Wat. Resour. Res. 15, 443–450 (1979).
Parlange, M. B. & Katul, G. G. Wat. Resour. Res. 28, 127–132 (1992).
Lins, H. F. & Michaels, P. J. Eos 75,281, 284, 285 (1994).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brutsaert, W., Parlange, M. Hydrologic cycle explains the evaporation paradox. Nature 396, 30 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1038/23845
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/23845
This article is cited by
-
Quantitative exploration of the innovative trend method for evapotranspiration and its sensitivity to climatic variables: The case study of Southeast Vietnam
Earth Science Informatics (2024)
-
Wetting and drying trends under climate change
Nature Water (2023)
-
Achieving efficient power generation by designing bioinspired and multi-layered interfacial evaporator
Nature Communications (2022)
-
Simulation of Actual Evapotranspiration and Evaluation of Three Complementary Relationships in Three Parallel River Basins
Water Resources Management (2022)
-
Land Use and Climate Change Impacts on Streamflow Using SWAT Model, Middle Awash Sub Basin, Ethiopia
Water Conservation Science and Engineering (2022)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.