It depends on whether you compare mass, energy, or carbon, but in all cases, the Earth's biosphere is much larger than humanity's oil consumption.
Current world oil consumption is about 100–105 million barrels/day.
That is approximately:
By comparison, global terrestrial and marine photosynthesis produces on the order of:
So by dry mass,
Dry biomass is roughly 45–50% carbon.
Thus:
Oil is about 85% carbon:
So humanity burns carbon in oil at about
Of course, humans also burn coal and natural gas. Total fossil fuel emissions today are about 10–11 billion tons of carbon/year, which is roughly 10–13% of annual global photosynthetic carbon fixation.
Oil contains roughly 42 MJ/kg.
Five billion tons therefore contain
Global net primary production (NPP) stores approximately
depending on the estimate.
Again, oil use is on the order of 10% of annual biological energy storage.
This comparison is important for proposals like your municipal solid waste (MSW) gasification concept.
Photosynthesis captures roughly 120 gigatons of carbon from the atmosphere each year, but almost all of it returns to the atmosphere through respiration, decay, or fire within years or decades. Only a tiny fraction becomes long-lived organic matter or fossil fuels.
Municipal solid waste represents biomass (plus plastics and other materials) that has already been harvested and concentrated by human activity. Recovering its chemical energy as syngas can therefore tap into a small portion of this enormous annual biological throughput without requiring additional cropland.
One caveat is that not all biomass is available for energy. Most annual biomass production:
The fraction that humans can sustainably harvest is much smaller than total global production.
For perspective, even if humanity replaced all current oil consumption with freshly grown biomass, it would require harvesting only a modest fraction of total annual global biomass production in principle. In practice, however, land use, nutrient cycling, biodiversity, water availability, and the diffuse nature of biomass make that substitution far more challenging than the global totals alone suggest. This is one reason waste-derived feedstocks, such as MSW, are attractive: the collection and transport infrastructure already exists, and the material would otherwise require disposal.