I'm not 100% sure I agree with this. I was a 3D animator for a while before I switched to programming and I'm still a potter. Modeling in clay is a good amount easier and more natural to do. There's a lot to be said for the tactile feedback of the clay and interacting with a model in 3D instead of interacting with a model through a variety of 2D interfaces which interact with the 3D model.
Granted, and I'm sure that there are many artists who would get a lot out of working with clay rather than a clumsy 2D interface, but don't forget that by working with a computer you gain a lot too, for example on a very superficial scale how easy is 'undo' and 'redo' when working with clay? Can you look at a history of all your actions to see just how you got that specific shape? How practical is storing different versions of your work? How easy is it to grab parts of different models and merge them to experiment with new things? How easy is it to share your work with others? These are all important considerations for content creation for a professional game. I'm not saying that 3d laser scanning has no applications, just that Dell's claim that it's so much easier is, just like the rest of his claims, naive and overstated.
I'd think it was most useful would be importing architecture.
You can get the whole interior of a building in a relatively short amount of time completely textured and to scale; exterior is a bit trickier, but can still be done in under a day depending on the size and complexity of the building.
I disagree, your stock objects like rocks and chairs and the like perhaps...but depending on the game I think architecture should be original content.