It's a very weird article, in that it tells a narrative about what went well with the oyster shells but does not quote or cite any sources for where that information is coming from. I don't think journalism is supposed to work that way.

Maybe they're really really really heavy shells. Each shell weighs 1 ton.

It most likely is. There is this comment in the discussion under the source post explaining it in detail (note: the user mentioned in that comment as OP is not the same user who crossposted it here).

For reference, this 500,000 tons* is more than the very largest supertankers carry.

*do not know if these are Imperial or Metric tons.

It literally is built of the things a oyster needs to grow so it counteracts some of the local ocean acidity and some of the shell dissolves from the acid. Dissolved nutrients spread out.

NY did old subway trains.

Thank you for explaining.

Absolutely, artificial reefs are not new in any way.

I didn't know that CO2 contributed to bleaching, but I know the heat sure does. I wonder if they sunk these lower than usual or something.

You're right though, the article is about as well researched as an ikea manual

So we should dump oyster shells around dwindling coral reefs? Sounds easy.

The post title and body read like AI clickbait, maybe that's why

sounds like they didn’t talk to any coral reef biologists.

I mean, it’s Florida…

They didn't even need to meet that high a standard, lol, even though they should have.

I'm just your garden variety Lemmy computer nerd and I use oyster shell in my own little back yard pond. Baking soda is also useful, which is sodium bicarbonate rather than calcium carbonate.

The carbonates help keep pH stable and help the all-important bacteria in the filter do their thing.

Headline kinda missed the scale of this whole thing.

It's LLM-generated from some mill called UpWorthy; the fact it's on Yahoo! News just lends it some credibility because most people aren't going to understand that, while Yahoo! News has some original articles of its own, it's primarily a news aggregator with minimal quality standards.

Restoring the balance of these elements is not only critical to marine life, but human life as well. And we're not just talking about food supply here. A lack of fish means a lack of income for fishermen, and higher prices at seafood restaurants. Dirty waters lead to a decline in tourism. Reefs even provide natural protection during coastal storms. It's almost like every aspect of our lives is directly affected by the state of our environment. What a concept!

OP genuinely doesn't seem to give a shit about the quality of what they post; I administered the other day what I think has been the first temp ban of a poster from !leopardsatemyface@lemmy.world because they refused to learn when their posts got removed for clear lack of relevance.

Edit: This article never once sources this information. The FDEP talks about using oysters but never says 500,000 tons, and all I can immediately find about that specific claim are some shitty AI videos from late 2025.

Edit 2: But here's a neat report! Again, though, the 500k number seems to have been pulled out of an AI hat.

I didn't think Yahoo generates it's own news. This is from a website called Upworthy

I’m calling it the Gulf of Brazil to help offset the fascist’s shenanigans.

It's only the Gulf Of America if you're in a cult or suffering from dementia and shitting in your diaper.

Sorry, I just think turtles are really good. 🐢🐢🐢

Crazy that oyster shells would work better than old car tyres. Who'd have thunk.

The article does not explain why anyone thought dumping items made of toxic materials into the ocean would be a good idea.