Technically that's not true. Oil is continuously being made but not at the rates of our extraction. Another often-used misnomer is the term “fossil fuel” in relation to oil. It's not "the remains or impression of a prehistoric plant or animal embedded in rock and preserved in petrified form." But coal does fit that description.

Few realise that the rationale of slavery too is tied to energy. Humans are the most efficient bio converters. The authors of In the Servitude of Power: Energy and Civilization Through the Ages, Jean-Claude Débeir, Jean-Paul Deléage and Daniel Hémery point this out >

“Nevertheless, and this is a very important point, the efficiency of the human-machine [20%] is the highest of the animal kingdom. That of the horse, for example, which had a major role in past energy systems, scarcely rises above 10% and that of the ox is still lower.

From the standpoint of energy, the use of draught animals is, therefore, a luxury. It will now be understood why, for centuries, the human converter was the most desirable. In historical circumstances where exosomatic organs are underdeveloped, slavery is a more rational energy system."

The thing that scares me the most is that the last time we lived in a fully evolved bio-based economy on the maximum boundary of our land-carrying capacity was just before the rise of industrialisation. For many countries that was at around 1/5 of their current population. Regional economies can't feed more... so what is going to happen to the 4/5 surplus population that we no longer can feed? That's a lot of people. As it takes roughly a century to halve a population safely by reducing the reproduction rate to the economically still viable 1,6-1,7 rate.