Is organic farming a realistic alternative when the population is so large??

I recently heard a radio interview with the head of a large farming co-operative in the mid-west who said that while there is no doubt that organic farming is better for the land, and does produce healthier consumer products, it simply is too exspensive, labor intensive and un-predicatable in the amount produced on an annual basis to ever replace the methods used in commercial farming. Basically, it could not produce a sufficient amount of food to feed the people it would need to. I am interested to hear how proponents for having the US go totally organic respond to that statement. Thanks.
Hmmm…some interesting points. I tend to agree that going totally organic would cause major problems in the lower income brackets…they simply could not afford to purchase the produce or have the space to grow it on their own. And I do agree that it is time to force commerical farmers to be more responsible in how they grow and in the end results of what they grow..this world is too big and too many families are hungry to justify throwing away any produce that is usable. Thanks for the input!

IF ALL THE FARMERS WERE TERNING ORGANIC AND IF ALL THE PEOPLE UNDERSTOOD THAT IS OK
TO NOT HAVE WATERMELON IN WINTER
EVERY BODY WOULD BE HEALTHIER WITH OUT BEING OBIS BECAUSE OF THE HORMONES IN THE VEGETABLE AND THE FRUITS!!!!