Estimating irrigation water use from remotely sensed evapotranspiration data: Accuracy and uncertainties at field, water right, and regional scales

Irrigated agriculture is the dominant user of water globally, but most water withdrawals are not monitored or reported. As a result, it is largely unknown when, where, and how much water is used for irrigation. Here, we evaluated the ability of remotely sensed evapotranspiration (ET) data, integrated with other datasets, to calculate irrigation water withdrawals and applications in an intensively irrigated portion of the United States. We compared irrigation calculations based on an ensemble of satellite-driven ET models from OpenET with reported groundwater withdrawals from hundreds of farmer irrigation application records and a statewide flowmeter database at three spatial scales (field, water right group, and management area). At the field scale, we found that ET-based calculations of irrigation agreed best with reported irrigation when the OpenET ensemble mean was aggregated to the growing season timescale (bias = 1.6–4.9 %, R 2 = 0.53–0.74), and agreement between calculated and reported irrigation was better for multi-year averages than for individual years. At the water right group scale, linking pumping wells to specific irrigated fields was the primary source of uncertainty. At the management area scale, calculated irrigation exhibited similar temporal patterns as flowmeter data but tended to be positively biased with more interannual variability. Disagreement between calculated and reported irrigation was strongly correlated with annual precipitation, and calculated and reported irrigation agreed more closely after statistically adjusting for annual precipitation. The selection of an ET model was also an important consideration, as variability across ET models was larger than the potential impacts of conservation measures employed in the region. From these results, we suggest key practices for working with ET-based irrigation data that include accurately accounting for changes in soil moisture, deep percolation, and runoff; careful verification of irrigated area and well-field linkages; and conducting application-specific evaluations of uncertainty. • Compared ET-based irrigation volumes to reported water use data at multiple scales. • ET-based irrigation volumes and reports agreed best at field scale. • Uncertainties include water balance closure and linking irrigated area to wells. • Variation among ET models is substantial relative to irrigation management actions. • ET-based irrigation tracking is promising but application-relevant uncertainties exist.