I just wanted to add a note about the Dragonfly suggestion that @devang brought up. At the moment, the Urban Weather Generator (UWG) does account for vegetation evapotranspiration but it is an extremely simple model that is in need of more development. Specifically, the UWG just models vegetation evapotranspiration as the absence of sensible heat (expressed by a latentFraction) and it does not do a full moisture balance of the urban area to figure out the impact of vegetation evapotranspiration on relative humidity or check the relative humidity to see if we are getting above the saturation point. So, while using the UWG is model better than nothing, take the specific results with a grain of salt.
@ChristianKongsgaard 's evapotranspiration work seems a lot more robust than anything currently in the UWG so I would recommend using his scripts if you are after a more detailed representation of evapotransipiration. Speaking of this, @ChristianKongsgaard , given that your scripts are in Python, it seems worthwhile to see if we can integrate them into the UWG. I posted some questions on the UWG github here if you wouldn’t mind answering them when you get the chance :
From what I can tell, the EnergyPlus vegetation material is actually doing a moisture balance calculation and you should read the documentation of it to make sure that you are using it correctly. As @ChristianKongsgaard says, make sure you are checking all of the properties of the vegetation to avoid a “garbage in, garbage out” scenario.