Everyone likes greenery and we all buy many small pots to plant trees in them and decorate our gardens with it, terraces, or balconies as well. It is most common that we see plants of flowers such as roses and marigolds in flower pots. We know that water and sunlight are the most essential things that a plant or tree needs for growth and we follow them. We water our plants in the morning and evening but there are other things that a plant needs other than water just like our own bodies. Plants need other nutrients to grow in the soil such as Nitrogen, Sulphur, and, Phosphorous and we give these nutrients in the form of fertilizer. We mix the fertilizers with the soil. I shall be talking about other very vital nutrients that a plant needs and that you can give them to grow. You can get various garden tools and fertilizers on sites like eBay and other important items that we need in gardening.
1) Organic fertilizers
People use it and are aware of it that it is good for plants. There are various types of organic fertilizers that have enough nutrients which a plant needs to grow properly. Natural fertilizer provides humous in the soil that keeps the soil moist and full of essential components. We need to mix it with soil at a fixed interval to see a good result. You can order it online in small packages and then use it or there are other ways to get this which I shall tell you in another article.
2) Cow dung manure
You might feel funny but cow dung is very good for plants and you must have seen farmers around you or in villages that they are using it for decades. Actually, when there was no chemical fertilizer then people used cow dung as manure to increase productivity. It is cheap and easy to get but you are advised to use rotten cow dung, not fresh one. The older the cow dung, the better the result. If you find any difficulty in getting it then you can also order it online from the above-mentioned site.
3) Bio-compost
Yes, it is true that our daily household waste such as vegetable and fruit peel can also be used as manure. You have to make a pit and compost all organic waste in it. When it gets decompose then you can add it to the soil. This will give a good amount of nutrients to the plant and it will grow very fast.
4) Leaf mould
If you have a garden then there would be trees and you can use the fallen leaves of the tree as a fertilizer to provide it with better growth. This is also cheaper and you need to collect the leaves and when they get dry just mix them with soil. It would a good amount of humus.
5) Chemical fertilizers
When we do not get organic manure and all those things that I have mentioned above. Then there is always an option that can be chosen, we can buy chemical fertilizer from the shop and add it to the soil. There are so many types of fertilizers which are available and you just need to know what your soil need. I know it seems easy but chemical fertilizers harm you in a long run. They can damage your body and you may fall sick
See, there are so many options that you have and you can choose anyone but in today’s world, I would personally say that go for healthy and use fewer and fewer chemicals.
About the Creator
Keep reading
More stories from Sumit Mishra and writers in Earth and other communities.
Essential Food Items That Should be Given to Birds
You must have seen various articles on dog and cat foods because people generally keep them as a pet. However, there are people who are bird lovers as well. They keep small birds such as parrots, pigeons, sparrows, and doves in their homes and take care of them. I have seen people that they take shelter for those birds who get injured and lose their wings or ability to fly. In that case, people take care of them but we get worried for these birds when giving them and they do not eat it. Well, we know that every pet eats a different type of food and birds also eat different food and we have to be careful about it. Birds have diverse dietary needs, and providing them with a variety of food items is crucial for their overall health and well-being. In this article, I shall be telling you about some essential food items that can be given to birds and you can easily order them from sites like eBay.
By Sumit Mishra3 years ago in Earth
The Dryads Are Calling
Deep within the heart of ancient forests, where sunlight filters through towering canopies and the air hums with life, there exists a world few humans truly understand. It is a world of dryads, the mythical tree spirits of folklore, silently observing, nurturing, and sometimes guiding the creatures that dwell among the trees. Today, their legend continues to captivate the imagination, blending myth, nature, and a touch of magic.
By Aarif Lashari18 minutes ago in Earth
Inside Trump's $11 Billion Health Plan to Replace “Neo-Colonial” USAID
In the landscape of global health aid, few proposals have stirred as much debate as former President Donald Trump’s ambitious plan to restructure American assistance abroad. Dubbed an $11 billion health initiative aimed at replacing USAID’s current framework, the plan seeks to pivot away from what Trump and his allies have criticized as the “neo-colonial” approach of U.S. foreign aid. While the plan promises greater efficiency and impact, experts are split on whether it is a practical solution or a politically driven gamble. Trump’s Critique of USAID The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has long been a central pillar of American foreign assistance, distributing billions in aid annually to address health crises, food insecurity, and development challenges worldwide. However, Trump’s administration and its supporters have often described USAID’s approach as bureaucratic, inefficient, and reflective of a “neo-colonial” mindset. In public statements, Trump argued that the U.S. was spending taxpayer dollars on programs that benefited foreign governments or contractors more than the intended local communities. Critics of the plan say that while USAID has flaws—as any large bureaucracy does—its extensive networks and decades of experience provide an unmatched capacity to deliver aid efficiently and safely. The Core of the $11 Billion Proposal At the heart of Trump’s proposal is an $11 billion fund designed to consolidate, modernize, and streamline U.S. health aid. Unlike the traditional USAID model, which relies heavily on long-term partnerships with governments and NGOs, the new plan emphasizes: Direct Impact Funding: Allocating resources to frontline health workers and local initiatives rather than intermediaries. Data-Driven Investments: Using real-time health data to target outbreaks and crises more efficiently. Private Sector Partnerships: Leveraging U.S. pharmaceutical companies, tech firms, and healthcare startups to deliver vaccines, treatments, and medical infrastructure. Shorter Program Cycles: Moving away from multi-year funding commitments in favor of more flexible, results-oriented programs. Proponents argue that this approach could reduce bureaucratic overhead and ensure U.S. aid reaches communities faster. By “cutting out the middlemen,” Trump supporters claim, America can avoid the pitfalls of slow-moving aid programs that sometimes fail to adapt to crises. Reactions from the Global Health Community Global health experts, however, have expressed concern about both the logistics and philosophy of the plan. Dr. Melissa Ortega, a senior researcher at the Global Health Policy Institute, explained, “The idea of bypassing established structures like USAID may sound appealing on paper, but in practice, it risks undermining decades of institutional knowledge. Health systems are complex, and short-term projects cannot replace long-term capacity building.” Some critics have also questioned the characterization of USAID as “neo-colonial.” While U.S. foreign aid has historically been tied to geopolitical interests, many programs today are designed collaboratively with recipient countries and local organizations. Reducing oversight could unintentionally increase the risk of misuse, corruption, or health inequities. On the other hand, supporters of Trump’s plan point to examples of inefficiency in USAID programs, citing cases where aid was delayed or mismanaged. By introducing more direct funding models, they argue, U.S. taxpayer dollars could achieve a higher “return on health outcomes.” Political Implications Trump’s health aid overhaul proposal is not just about international development—it is also deeply political. Framing USAID as a “neo-colonial” institution resonates with a populist narrative that America should prioritize its own citizens and assert greater control over how taxpayer money is spent abroad. Domestically, the $11 billion plan faces scrutiny from Congress. Lawmakers from both parties have questioned whether dismantling USAID’s systems could destabilize ongoing health programs in countries where the U.S. has long-term commitments. The potential impact on global health security—including the fight against pandemics like COVID-19—adds another layer of concern. Internationally, U.S. allies and partner nations are watching closely. Sudden shifts in aid delivery could disrupt health programs in low- and middle-income countries, many of which rely on predictable funding cycles to maintain vaccination campaigns, maternal health services, and disease surveillance. Possible Benefits and Risks If executed carefully, the Trump-backed model could bring several benefits: Faster Response Times: Direct funding could accelerate delivery of vaccines, treatments, and emergency support. Innovation Boost: By partnering with private sector companies, the plan could accelerate development of new health technologies. Accountability: With performance-based metrics, the plan may better measure the impact of U.S. aid. However, the risks are equally significant: Disruption of Existing Programs: Abrupt changes could destabilize ongoing health projects. Loss of Expertise: USAID’s decades of experience in navigating local governance, supply chains, and community engagement may be hard to replace. Geopolitical Fallout: Allies accustomed to collaborating with USAID might see the move as destabilizing, reducing cooperation on global health initiatives. Looking Ahead As Trump and his allies continue to advocate for this $11 billion overhaul, the debate over the future of U.S. health aid is intensifying. Proponents view it as a necessary modernization of an outdated system, while critics fear it could undercut decades of carefully built infrastructure and global partnerships. Ultimately, the success of this plan will hinge on its ability to balance efficiency with stability, innovation with oversight, and political objectives with humanitarian needs. For now, the proposal remains controversial, representing a dramatic departure from traditional approaches to U.S. foreign aid. Whether it will reshape global health for the better—or simply create more uncertainty—remains to be seen. In the end, the Trump health plan is as much about ideology as it is about dollars. It challenges the conventional wisdom of international development and asks whether a more streamlined, results-focused approach can truly replace a system built over decades. As the world watches, the stakes could not be higher: the future of U.S. global health aid—and the lives it touches—hangs in the balance.
By Muhammad Hassan5 days ago in Earth
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.