In this episode of Office Hours, Dr. Daniel Beverly and Product Scientist Chris Chambers answer questions about evapotranspiration (ET) and the Variance Bowen Ratio (VBR) method. Watch the episode to learn more about

• The differences between reference ET, crop ET, and actual ET
• How to characterize hydraulic plant stress more accurately using actual ET
• How VBR methods support scaling ET measurements across a larger area
• How to determine which instrument(s) and measurements match your application

If you would like to learn more about this topic, you can watch the recorded webinar about ET and VBR technology.

Questions?

Our scientists have decades of experience helping researchers and growers measure the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum.

• Talk to an expert
• Request a quote

Transcript:

BRAD NEWBOLD 0:00
Hello, everyone, and welcome to Office Hours with the METER Environment team. Today’s session will focus on evapotranspiration measurements, and we’re shooting for about thirty to forty minutes of Q&A with our experts, Daniel Beverly and Jeff Ritter, whom I will introduce in just a moment.

But before we start, one housekeeping item. If you’re watching this video and you think of a question you’d like to ask our science experts, we encourage you to submit your question on our website at METER Group dot com. And then someone from our science and support team will get back to you with an answer via email.

Alright. With that out of the way, let’s get started. Today, our panelists are scientists Daniel Beverly and Jeff Ritter. Daniel is a research scientist at METER Group. He earned his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in ecology and biology from the University of Northern Colorado, where he focused on measuring CO2 fluxes following bark beetle infestations and the subsequent forest management.

He received his PhD in hydrological sciences from the University of Wyoming with a focus on using sap flux and eddy covariance to disentangle how plants, management practices, and climate change modulate CO2 and H2O fluxes. Before joining METER Group, he was also a USDA research fellow at Indiana University, where he developed new tools for measuring soil water potential aligned with ecosystem scale measurements of carbon and water exchange.

His current research at METER Group is focused on developing instruments to measure the soil plant atmospheric continuum. Jeff Ritter is the product scientist for plant, canopy, and atmospheric monitoring instrumentation here at METER.

He earned his master’s degree in plant physiology from Washington State University, where his research focused on leaf level gas exchange and the impact of plant biochemistry on the measurement of the global carbon cycle.

Prior to working at METER, he held a research faculty position at Washington State University in the Department of Crop and Soil Sciences. So thanks for joining us, guys.

JEFF RITTER 1:45
Yeah. Thanks, Brad. Daniel, it’s nice to see you. So excited to talk about evapotranspiration, and I’m hoping to learn a little something today too, so.

DANIEL BEVERLY 1:58
It should be fun. We’ve got quite a few good questions, so.

BRAD NEWBOLD 2:05
Alright. Our first question for today is, why is ET measured with just one dimension?

For example, millimeters or inches, instead of that dimension over a specific area of measurement.

JEFF RITTER 2:25
Yeah. Something I’m interested to learn as well. I know why it’s done that way for precipitation. So, I mean, maybe it makes some sense, but I just wanna know what the official reason is for that.

DANIEL BEVERLY 2:45
Sure. Yeah. I mean, that’s a pretty great question actually. So when we really think about this evapotranspiration is actually latent heat flux. And so we use latent heat flux, which is in units of watts per meter squared. So that’s your energy at watts, which is a joules per second relative to a square meter. And so that is an energy number, but then we can convert that using the latent heat of vaporization, which is essentially the amount of energy it takes for water to actually evaporate.

And so the latent heat of vaporization is in joules per kilogram. So how many joules of energy does it take to evaporate a kilogram of water?

And so when we use that and we divide those out, the joules divide out and so then we’re left with essentially kilograms meter squared per second.

And we know that a kilogram of water can be a cubic meter. And so we can divide those out and get the meter squared. So there goes two of the m components. And so then we essentially have a meter per unit time.

So that gives us meters per second, which is a really small number typically when we think about evaporation. So we distill that down and scale it based off of millimeters and per second is really hard to imagine how many water molecules are leaving per second. So we usually scale the temporal domain up to hour or day or even thirty minute periods or so much. So that’s how we get from actually going from a square meter to an actual millimeter or a volume measurement.

Right?

And so it’s still representative of a square meter and it’s the average water loss or the water flux for that square meter, but it’s represented in a unit length per time.

JEFF RITTER 5:15
That makes it convenient then for if you’re measuring precipitation, you know how much it’s raining in millimeters or inches.

DANIEL BEVERLY 5:25
Yeah. And so usually when we irrigate, we say we’re gonna add, you know, like even a couple liters or something. And so then we can say millimeters, we can convert that back to meters. And so, yeah, so it pairs well with our precipitation and our irrigation measurements. And so it’s convenient that it works that way in a line so we can hopefully manage those fluxes or inputs and outputs very well.

BRAD NEWBOLD 5:55
Are there instances where you would want to be talking about it in terms of a heat flux instead of millimeters?

DANIEL BEVERLY 6:05
I think for actual scaling the measurements, I think it’s easier to keep when we use sap flow. So for example, if we’re scaling between leaf measurements or individual plant measurements and ecosystem measurements, that’s when it’s really valuable to keep it in a unit that’s a square meter. So sap flow would be essentially how much flow per stem volume, which is scaled to a square meter. And so that allows us to capture flux per unit area, and we can compare that a little bit better. And so depending on what our questions are and how we’re trying to scale or downscale the measurements, it can be really valuable.

Likewise, you know a lot about gas exchange and leaf level gas exchange. Those are typically scaled to like, know, micromoles per meter squared per second, you know, so it’s still per space per unit time. So it’s a lot easier to scale those relative to the watts per meter squared since they align a little easier.

BRAD NEWBOLD 7:15
Alright. Next question. Is there a typical footprint for an ET sensor or does it depend entirely on wind conditions?

And does the footprint change according to the measurement method of the sensor?

JEFF RITTER 7:32
Yeah. This is one where I get this question a lot about weather stations.

So I would like to see your answer regarding evapotranspiration sensors and how that’s different for like something that’s just measuring met parameters.

DANIEL BEVERLY 7:52
Yeah, absolutely. I mean, that’s a good question as well. So when we think about it from a perspective of what the flux tower or a, we’ll start with a flux tower and then we’ll talk about another ET measurement or another ET sensor. But so for example, if we think about flux towers, we’re trying to measure, we have one measurement point, right?

At a single foci, and essentially we’re waiting for turbulence to move past the sensor. And so that makes it so that we must rely on a dynamic footprint. And so that’s dependent on where it is in the atmospheric boundary layer. So there’s certain areas that are more turbulent or less turbulent as we go vertical.

So if you’re too close to the canopy, you’re not getting enough mixing with the atmosphere.

So that changes how we think about the footprint.

Ideally, we need to be within a well mixed boundary layer. So that’s why we want the sensor to be installed, not just a couple of inches above the crop canopy, we want it to be installed a meter above the canopy or two meters because that’s where we’re getting a much more similar turbulent exchange between humidity and temperature. And so up at that level, that’s primarily being driven by turbulence.

And so that allows the water in temperature and CO2 molecules to be swept past the sensor, which then we can interpolate and scale across the flux measurement.

So it’s not entirely driven by wind speed, but it’s driven by turbulence, sensor elevation, and potentially even surface roughness of the crop. So if we have a really nice, beautiful flat wheat field, the surface roughness is going to be much different as opposed to one of these wetland marshes that we have outside where we have really variable shrubs, these managed fields, and then, you know, native or unmanaged grasses that are kind of weeds. So we’re gonna have the really dynamic variable canopy. So the roughness layer is much different.

And so all of these play an important role into the actual footprint.

There’s another type of sensor, which is a scintillometer, which is where we use essentially a large laser beam and we shoot across can be kilometers in distance. You can shoot mountaintop to mountaintop, and you’re actually using a much wider footprint, but it still relies on turbulence and as it’s moving across this laser path, we can actually capture the entire footprint. So the footprints can be variable depending on the method, but a lot of them are wind dependent, turbulence dependent. So that’s why we often think about and often why ET sensors don’t work well at night.

There’s not enough turbulence to actually mix everything in the atmosphere. And so that’s a hard measurement to get when there’s no wind or no turbulence.

JEFF RITTER 11:15
So not talking about the scintillometer, but something like a VBR or an EC tower, is there an ideal footprint size that you’re going for? Or how do you determine, you know, if you’re able to mount this at one meter or two meters, how do you decide?

DANIEL BEVERLY 11:38
Yeah, so I guess it really depends on the size of field you have.

And so for example, if I had a smaller field, I would sacrifice if I had a smaller field that I was really particular in the behavior of that crop or that vegetation, I would sacrifice a little bit of height just to make sure I’m not getting interference from beyond my field. So for example, if I had a small field and I put it way too high and I saw a parking lot next door, that would change how I would have to interpret my flux measurements. So it depends, I know is always a frustrating answer, but we really just need to be cognizant of what’s around our flux measurements and how we’re interpreting them. And so sometimes, and I’ve done this a lot throughout my PhD, was thinking about we have to install the flux tower at different heights, and we can kind of estimate if we’re seeing the field or if we’re seeing beyond the field. And so the first installation might not be perfect.

JEFF RITTER 13:05
Is the goal then trying to get homogeneity within that footprint as much as possible?

DANIEL BEVERLY 13:12
I would say, absolutely.

I mean, and maybe your question is different, and you’re trying to say, my hydrological interests or my water management interests are understanding the water losses from this entire area that’s part wetland and part managed turf field, or, you know, maybe you’re on a golf course and you have, you know, some natural areas and highly irrigated golf course turf.

Maybe you wanna know what is the water loss across all of those conditions. Or maybe you just wanna know just my grass turf that’s being heavily irrigated and fertigated. And so it depends on your question. And if we think about what a reference ET sensor is measuring, it’s kind of measuring a little bit of both, but it’s more of the direct microenvironment.

And so thinking about reference ET, that’s when you really want the best reference ET is going to come from your field, not a meteorological station down the next city over or a different crop or something. So having an actual weather station in your field for reference ET is typically the most desirable condition because the humidity gradients and the turbulent gradients are most representative of your field.

JEFF RITTER 15:05
Absolutely.

BRAD NEWBOLD 15:08
Okay. This next question is asking, what affects the upper and lower limits of the fetch required for the VBR method? And can I effectively measure ET in an enclosed environment or in an outdoor space with obstructions?

JEFF RITTER 15:28
Yeah, Daniel, I’m not sure about that one.

DANIEL BEVERLY 15:32
So we kind of talked a little bit about that with, you know, how we install it. And so that’s the limit of our fetch is temperature, is height and roughness and turbulence dependent.

JEFF RITTER 15:48
I can’t imagine though that if this is turbulence dependent, it’s gonna do well in an enclosed environment.

DANIEL BEVERLY 15:58
Exactly, yeah.

It’s not gonna do well in a closed environment. So, you might have fans in your greenhouse, but you’re still not measuring turbulence.

And so while it might feel windy and gusty, the turbulence and the atmospheric mixing is not really mixing with the atmosphere. And so your exchange is not representative.

Then, so even if you had an urban environment, it would be very challenging to use this in a purely urban environment where you’re trying to measure in shadowy buildings and you have energy gradients, like you’re gonna have these black bodies that are radiating energy from all directions.

Because the ATMOS 51 and the VBR method really is assuming energy balance is coming from incoming radiation from the sun and it’s being emitted by the vegetation below. So we have the defined albedo and then the energy storage is kind of modeled and defined.

And so in an urban environment or an outdoor environment full of obstructions, whether that be buildings or even outbuildings, like even maybe you’re not in an urban environment, but you have like a ranch situation that’s got a lot of outbuildings, you do not wanna have this right next to your outbuildings.

JEFF RITTER 18:00
So let’s say that we’re in some urban environment where we do want to measure ET, you’re saying this might not be the best method.

We obviously can’t have a big eddy covariance tower in some downtown street. Is reference ET the best way to go for that or what?

DANIEL BEVERLY 18:18
Potentially, I mean, think one of the biggest things that we’re trying, that’s hard to do with urban environments is actually characterizing the energy. And so, we need at least a net radiometer to really understand the incoming and outgoing radiation dynamics. And so you might be able to use the Bowen ratio from the VBR, but you really need to pair that with really tightly characterized radiation measurements, soil heat flux measurements.

And then there’s also all these shadows and shading that really make it complicated. And then lastly, it’s that the turbulence in the mixing in an urban environment is typically not what we would really look for because it’s much more of an erratic turbulent flow as in swirling. And that’s harder to characterize the swirling eddies rather than just turbulence. And so you might be better off if you’re truly looking at urban systems, we are starting to see an uptick in eddy covariance being used in urban systems. It’s usually for monitoring methane and carbon, but water would be also important.

But if you’re in an urban system where you’re trying to measure a ball field, we can use it there. But what I’m envisioning is like a major metro area full of concrete, that’s gonna be, you know, you have these poor trees that are isolated in these little planters.

So yeah, outdoors, yes, but knowing your environment is pretty key.

JEFF RITTER 20:45
Yeah, and I think that speaks to making sure that you understand the measurement that you’re trying to use, understand its limitations.

I think that comes from reference ET as well.

DANIEL BEVERLY 21:00
Absolutely.

JEFF RITTER 21:02
All of these that we’ve talked about so far have limitations. A lot of them have different limitations. And so knowing when each one works, I think is important.

DANIEL BEVERLY 21:15
Absolutely.

BRAD NEWBOLD 21:18
Here’s a question asking, can you provide examples of projects that would benefit from actual ET measurements in addition to reference ET available from an on-site weather station?

JEFF RITTER 21:35
I’m really interested in this idea of pairing reference ET with actual ET. I think we touched on it a little bit there talking about some situations where you might use one or the other, but I’m interested to see if you have much experience using both at the same time and when that makes the most sense.

DANIEL BEVERLY 21:58
Yeah, both have their value, right? And we kind of just mentioned that each has its own limitations.

And so there is a big advantage sometimes to having both. And so starting with reference ET, like it’s a very powerful tool, but we never really know what the actual plants are doing, right? It’s a reference. And so we’re making some assumptions there and we’re making assumptions with all measurements, but we’re getting a much more direct measurement of the actual plant behavior and the soil behavior when we have actual ET.

One of the really fun things that we’re doing right now and starting to dive a little deeper into is trying to use the combination of actual ET relative to reference ET to actually understand plant stress. And so thinking about if we have a condition where reference ET and plant ET are very similar, then we would imagine that the vegetation is probably pretty happy.

JEFF RITTER 23:20
So we’re assuming there that reference ET is kind of the max we would expect in those cases.

DANIEL BEVERLY 23:30
Yeah, or just like a really stable condition, right? And we often see actual ET be higher reference ET just based off of leaf area and some of these other parameters. But the idea is if they’re tracking very similarly, then we would assume we have a very nice healthy plant.

Alternatively, if we think about as they begin to deviate, we can actually see and understand that this actual ET is lower than reference ET, then they’re not using as much water, which would likely indicate some level of crop stress or water stress. And I think that is going to be a really future or a powerful tool in the future for both understanding and monitoring forest health, and even for crop and agriculture, because many of these agricultural varieties and cultivars really rely on crop steering and as we try to steer or allocate how the plant is associating or using carbon, whether that to be vegetative growth or some of the fruiting bodies.

So example, we can think about olives, you know, you want to stress the plants a little bit so that more sugars and more of the carbon is transported into making a bigger seed for olive oil as opposed to more leaves.

And so we can kind of manipulate the water and irrigation cycle, but it’s really hard to do that with crop coefficients and just reference ET. And we’ll see actual ET, we can see it go down, but we don’t know if that’s driven by phenology or some other pests or some other things. So having the combination of reference ET and actual ET provides a really cool and unique insight on plant stress for crop steering.

And I think as we keep digging deeper, we’re gonna find more applications where having both, and so, I mean, often in environmental research, having more data eliminates a lot of processes. So of course we would also probably want soil moisture.

JEFF RITTER 26:25
And I was about to ask you, what other sensors can we pair?

When we’re looking at water balance, plants are a huge driver of that, so we really want to be asking questions from their perspective. And so being able to see what’s under the soil, think is going to be important.

DANIEL BEVERLY 26:45
Exactly. And even if you started to see these stress marks, could go and say, Oh, maybe we should go sample leaf level gas exchange or pressure chamber measurements. Maybe we pull out the porometer and go check the stomatal conductance and see if that is still following our conditions. Partially it’s like, okay, if we see actual ET decrease, but soil moisture not decreasing, that could be indication of infection or maybe you’re over water, water logging or something that could be other detrimental processes.

BRAD NEWBOLD 27:30
Since the sensor is geared towards use in well watered or irrigated agricultural fields or other applications, what other information might we need to be able to use it in dry land applications?

DANIEL BEVERLY 27:48
Yeah, that’s a good question.

Thinking about it from how the sensor works, the sensor has several assumptions about albedo. So it assumes albedo or the energy absorption capacity is about zero point two three, and that’s pretty common in agricultural settings.

But if you’re in a wild land or a dry land system, that’s going to likely be different based off of how much soil exposure you have and so forth.

And so I guess the best way I would go about that would be adding a net radiometer to try to actually measure the incoming and outgoing radiation to characterize this incoming and outgoing radiation.

JEFF RITTER 28:45
So is the shortwave component the assumption in there, or do we make assumptions about longwave as well?

DANIEL BEVERLY 28:55
Yeah, we make some assumptions about longwave as well, but most of it’s the outgoing radiation based off of how much is being reflected out. There’s also some assumptions about soil heat flux. And so we assume that soil heat flux is approximately ten percent of your net radiation, which might not be true. It might be more like twenty to thirty percent in a really dry, arid or sparsely vegetated ecosystem.

So it might also be advantageous to add soil heat flux plates under some of these bare soil conditions.

JEFF RITTER 29:40
And I mean, it’s worth mentioning that a lot of those same assumptions are made in Penman-Monteith, know, FAO-56 reference ET where we’re measuring shortwave incoming modeling, extrapolating the net radiation.

DANIEL BEVERLY 29:58
Yeah, that’s very true. I mean, even in eddy covariance, using eddy covariance still relies on soil heat flux and accurate incoming radiation measurements. Yes, you’re measuring the latent heat flux and the sensible heat flux, but to actually do the full energy balance closure, we truly need all of these different pieces.

So of course, adding those under conditions that were outside of the scope of our instrument, then yeah, absolutely, you’re gonna get much better resolution and better ET estimates.

BRAD NEWBOLD 30:45
All right.

Next question. Can ET measurements be used for crops that don’t photosynthesize? Maybe like mushrooms.

JEFF RITTER 31:02
Now, Daniel, my background is in plant sciences, and I know nothing about mushrooms. My instinct here, and please correct me if I’m wrong though, is that we’re just interested in how much water is being lost over a field. So, if you are trying to control the water balance of whatever crop you’re growing, ET might work for you depending on how you’re growing it. But I wanna get your sense specific to mushrooms, if you know much about those.

DANIEL BEVERLY 31:40
Yeah, I don’t know a whole lot about mushrooms either. I have visited or toured a mushroom growing facility, which was super interesting.

But from what I know about how they cultivate mushrooms, it’s inside, so that’s not gonna work for the ATMOS 51. Alternatively, it’s also done in the dark. And so mushrooms are typically grown in the dark and so there’s no grow lights. So why would you waste energy on, you know, lighting them and heating them? They like the damp cool.

So I don’t think our instrument for measuring ET would be very valuable here.

JEFF RITTER 32:35
I mean, I think except for maybe when we were talking about like truffles.

DANIEL BEVERLY 32:42
Yeah, exactly. Truffles you could do.

JEFF RITTER 32:48
Truffles might be of interest, but I think then you’re also really looking at the trees that they’re growing underneath. Yeah. You’re making sure that you have enough water for those trees.

And I think the truffles come along.

DANIEL BEVERLY 33:05
That’s a good point.

JEFF RITTER 33:08
As a result.

DANIEL BEVERLY 33:10
Yeah. I think it’d be really challenging though to use something that doesn’t photosynthesize, mostly just because most of the energy driving evapotranspiration is the same energy as that’s driving photosynthesis. And so I think we would have to get at maybe like vapor pressure gradients in a little bit different way for we’re looking at ET or water losses or evaporative demand from a mushroom operation.

That’s a really interesting question though, and I would really like to see what people are doing with mushroom cultivation is particularly with water balance, ET, or VPD.

JEFF RITTER 34:08
And if they’re growing mushrooms outside, I wanna know.

DANIEL BEVERLY 34:15
Yeah.

BRAD NEWBOLD 34:18
Alright.

We’re getting close to the end of our time. We’ve got time for a couple more questions here. This one is asking, are ET measurements affected by regional climates? For instance, coastal versus interior regions, marsh versus prairies, high versus low altitudes, etcetera.

JEFF RITTER 34:45
Interesting. I mean, we’ve touched a little bit on the need for homogeneity within your footprint itself, but what if we have, and I don’t know if this is exactly what this question is asking, but what if we are setting these stations up in highly disparate regions? What sort of intercomparability are we gonna see there?

DANIEL BEVERLY 35:12
Yeah, I mean, that’s a good question. I mean, we know climate in general is a major contributor to how evapotranspiration is being driven. And so the short answer is yes, ET measurements are affected by regional climates, but I mean, there’s a lot more to that. So when we think about coastal regions versus interior regions, we think about the radiation availability and like how much energy is being stored. So for example, marshes and wetlands, you know, you got the sensor that we’ve developed really focuses on an assumption of soil heat flux. If you have open bodies of water, energy storage in water or marshes is much different than soil.

And so it would be, you’d have to be really cautious if you’re setting up a giant network of these to run up potentially, okay, we’ll say a marsh to prairie or a hill slope gradient that goes from a dry land to a marsh down on the bottom of the hill.

You would definitely wanna be cognizant and a little cautious about how you’re going to compare this because unless you’re going to provide radiation measurements or soil heat flux measurements, it might be harder to constrain some of those energy numbers because we know that the gradient is going to be quite large across even a hill slope gradient, whether in that, if you’re going high and low altitude, I guess you could use this, but you might wanna, I feel like the Bowen ratio is still valuable, but you still need to be able to control some of these other micrometeorological conditions, whether that be radiation or wind speed, some of these other factors that are important.

JEFF RITTER 37:10
And I also think about if some of these environments are more likely to be prone to advective conditions as well.

DANIEL BEVERLY 37:20
Absolutely. That’s a good one. Yeah, so an advection is a really important thing to consider and especially how we think about evapotranspiration. So that’s a really good thing to think about.

So if you’re really cognizant or measuring, your primary interest is a marsh or a very wet irrigated agricultural field. If your neighbor has a parking lot or a very, very barren field, the energy gradients between those are going to be very different, but they’re also gonna be interacting. And so you’re gonna get these advective fluxes and advective conditions switching between the two fields, where the hot air is moving over the cold field and sucking out a lot of water. And so you’re gonna have to be able to understand these conditions and when that’s going to happen and start thinking about how you’re going to dissect some of these questions or these issues with flux measurements in general.

That is a good question. And really as a lot of these, it’s going to depend on your question and how you wanna address them, but it really comes back to something we already talked about was the limitations. Yeah. And just knowing, know thy limitations is a very important thing.

BRAD NEWBOLD 39:05
All right. So we are out of time. So this is gonna be our last question for today.

And it is asking, does too much or too little soil moisture affect measurements taken by the ATMOS 51 or the VBR method generally?

So, I’m you know, we’ve kind of been dancing around the topic of a total water balance, and that’s ultimately what we’re getting at with the VBR, where we’re looking at water loss over a surface, but we’ve mentioned a couple of times the inputs like precipitation and then soil moisture as well. So what, I guess this is kind of wondering, like what sort of interplay do we see there between soil moisture and are there limits when the soil gets too dry or if it’s fully saturated, you know, how does that affect the VBR method?

DANIEL BEVERLY 40:05
Sure. I mean, I think that’s a good thing. I mean, so one of the nice things is since that VBR method and the ATMOS 51 rely on first principles of humidity and temperature, there’s no real direct connection to soil moisture.

And so of course we’re going to see the vegetation below the system behave.

And that’s what we’re really trying to understand is how’s the vegetation feeling when it’s too dry or too wet. And so this kind of goes understanding when it’s too dry, we’re gonna see the ET decline, but we don’t know always if that’s completely driven by soil moisture or phenology.

And likewise, if there’s too much moisture or you’re waterlogged or something or over irrigating, for example, if you have over watering potatoes or something, you’re going to see decreases in yield. So that might also be very visible if you see stomates close in the middle of the day. And so you’re gonna see potentially that happening.

But this goes also next to the question of where do we use reference ET and actual ET at the same time? Yeah. This really helps us dissect some of these questions of saying, what should my plant be doing and what is it doing?

JEFF RITTER 41:35
Yeah, mean, I think we want to have as complete a picture as possible of how water’s moving through this landscape. And that involves, you know, what it should be doing, what it is doing, what the storage is in the soil. And then hopefully we can get a direct measurement of water movement through the plant make that a little more convenient.

DANIEL BEVERLY 42:05
We’ll get the full picture. Yeah. That’s the goal.

BRAD NEWBOLD 42:12
Alright. That wraps it up for us today. Thank you again for joining us. We hope you enjoyed the discussion, and thank you again for all the great questions that everybody submitted.

Again, if you have any questions that we didn’t answer, please contact us via our website, METER Group dot com. Finally, subscribe to the METER Group YouTube channel and accept notifications to see previous episodes of Office Hours and to get notified when future videos are available. Thanks again. Stay safe, and have a great day.