I disagree. Just following your source to its conclusion, I think it’s safe to say OA (organic agriculture) is better all around:

7.1 Pros • Lower emissions of CO 2 , N 2 O, and CH4 • Enhanced soil and water quality • Lower energy use per land area • Higher energy efficiency per land area 7.2 Cons • Lower soil profile SOC stocks [i.e. how much carbon is in the soil] • Lower crop yields • Higher land requirement • Lower energy production per land area

Your conclusion that we’d have to clear more land for agriculture use if we all switched to OA seems flawed; e.g. here in Germany we use about 60% of agricultural land to raise livestock feed like corn etc (https://www.landwirtschaft.de/tier-und-pflanze/pflanze/was-waechst-auf-deutschlands-feldern). Seems to me like eating less meat and growing idk lentils or beans would not immediately lead to food insecurity.

This is also what the FAO says: yes, OA leads to yield reduction when compared to conventional methods, but not to food scarcity and instead to healthier ecosystems (https://www.fao.org/organicag/oa-faq/oa-faq6/en/).

(sry gotta go, more.later)

meh. nutritional value is about the same, yeah, but that’s not the point of organic food. people who claim that eating an all organic diet makes you better are yahoos.

The point of organic farming is that it is just all-around better for the planet, the soil, the organisms therein and less polluting.

I think they mean the destruction of Carthage 😉