The lack of consistent, accurate information on evapotranspiration (ET) and consumptive use of water by irrigated agriculture is one of the most important data gaps for water managers in the western United States (U.S.) and other arid agricultural regions globally. The ability to easily access information on ET is central to improving water budgets across the West, advancing the use of data‐driven irrigation management strategies, and expanding incentive‐driven conservation programs. Recent advances in remote sensing of ET have led to the development of multiple approaches for field‐scale ET mapping that have been used for local and regional water resource management applications by U.S. state and federal agencies. The OpenET project is a community‐driven effort that is building upon these advances to develop an operational system for generating and distributing ET data at a field scale using an ensemble of six well‐established satellite‐based approaches for mapping ET. Key objectives of OpenET include: Increasing access to remotely sensed ET data through a web‐based data explorer and data services; supporting the use of ET data for a range of water resource management applications; and development of use cases and training resources for agricultural producers and water resource managers. Here we describe the OpenET framework, including the models used in the ensemble, the satellite, meteorological, and ancillary data inputs to the system, and the OpenET data visualization and access tools. We also summarize an extensive intercomparison and accuracy assessment conducted using ground measurements of ET from 139 flux tower sites instrumented with open path eddy covariance systems. Results calculated for 24 cropland sites from Phase I of the intercomparison and accuracy assessment demonstrate strong agreement between the satellite‐driven ET models and the flux tower ET data. For the six models that have been evaluated to date (ALEXI/DisALEXI, eeMETRIC, geeSEBAL, PT‐JPL, SIMS, and SSEBop) and the ensemble mean, the weighted average mean absolute error (MAE) values across all sites range from 13.6 to 21.6 mm/month at a monthly timestep, and 0.74 to 1.07 mm/day at a daily timestep. At seasonal time scales, for all but one of the models the weighted mean total ET is within ±8% of both the ensemble mean and the weighted mean total ET calculated from the flux tower data. Overall, the ensemble mean performs as well as any individual model across nearly all accuracy statistics for croplands, though some individual models may perform better for specific sites and regions. We conclude with three brief use cases to illustrate current applications and benefits of increased access to ET data, and discuss key lessons learned from the development of OpenET.

Characterization of model errors is important when applying satellite-driven evapotranspiration (ET) models to water resource management problems. This study examines how uncertainty in meteorological forcing data and land surface modeling propagate through to errors in final ET data calculated using the Satellite Irrigation Management Support (SIMS) model, a computationally efficient ET model driven with satellite surface reflectance values. The model is applied to three instrumented winegrape vineyards over the 2017–2020 time period and the spatial and temporal variation in errors are analyzed. We illustrate how meteorological data inputs can introduce biases that vary in space and at seasonal timescales, but that can persist from year to year. We also observe that errors in SIMS estimates of land surface conductance can have a particularly strong dependence on time of year. Overall, meteorological inputs introduced RMSE of 0.33–0.65 mm/day (7–27%) across sites, while SIMS introduced RMSE of 0.55–0.83 mm/day (19–24%). The relative error contribution from meteorological inputs versus SIMS varied across sites; errors from SIMS were larger at one site, errors from meteorological inputs were larger at a second site, and the error contributions were of equal magnitude at the third site. The similar magnitude of error contributions is significant given that many satellite-driven ET models differ in their approaches to estimating land surface conductance, but often rely on similar or identical meteorological forcing data. The finding is particularly notable given that SIMS makes assumptions about the land surface (no soil evaporation or plant water stress) that do not always hold in practice. The results of this study show that improving SIMS by eliminating these assumptions would result in meteorological inputs dominating the error budget of the model on the whole. This finding underscores the need for further work on characterizing spatial uncertainty in the meteorological forcing of ET.

For many applications in environmental remote sensing, the interpretation of a given measurement depends strongly on what time of year the measurement was taken. This is particularly the case for phenology studies concerned with identifying when plant developmental transitions occur, but it is also true for a wide range of applications including vegetation species classification, crop yield estimation, and more. This study explores the use of Fisher Discriminant Analysis (FDA) as a method for extracting time-resolved information from multivariate environmental time series data. FDA is useful because it can be applied to multivariate input data and, for phenological estimation problems, produces a transformation that is physically interpretable. This work contains both theoretical and applied components. First, we use FDA to demonstrate the time-resolved nature of phenological information. Where curve-fitting and other commonly used data transformations that are sensitive to variation throughout a full time series, we show how FDA identifies application-relevant variation in specific variables at specific points in time. Next, we apply FDA to estimate county-average corn planting dates in the United States corn belt. We find that using multivariate data inputs can reduce prediction RMSE (in days) by 20% relative to models using only univariate inputs. We also compare FDA (which is linear) to nonlinear planting date estimation models based on curve-fitting and random forest estimators. We find that multivariate FDA models significantly improve on univariate curve-fitting and have comparable performance when using the same univariate inputs (despite the linearity of FDA). We also find that FDA-based approaches have lower RMSE than random forest in all configurations. Finally, we interpret FDA coefficients for individual measurements sensitive to vegetation density, land surface temperature, and soil moisture by relating them to physical mechanisms indicative of earlier or later planting.