It often takes more energy to grow food locally (greenhouses and fertilizer) than transported food.
Antibiotic-raised foods grow faster and thus have better caloric ratios, and less farmland per pound of beef.
There are many ways in which organic and non-organic affect the environment other than land use (which is likely a marginal difference). Big agro, most associated with non-organic farming, does lots of bad things for the environment. Pesticides that are linked to decline of bee populations, pesticides that yield local imbalances in what animals/bugs are around to eat each other, synthetic fertilizers that thrash the land from being able to grow diverse crops into the future, chemical run offs into local water sources, exposure of workers to high concentrations of pesticides and their subsequent-related illnesses, GMO seeds spreading farther than the intended land mass mating with other species producing unknown effects (and lawsuits), etc.
- organic food is bad for the environment
- organic food is less space efficient to grow
- organic food may have lower crop yields> - organic food is less space efficient to grow > - organic food may have lower crop yields
These are the same thing. If you have to generate X calories, and you generate fewer per acre, then you need more acres of crop.