The definition was shaped to promote Tesla battery car purchases.

Until recently, Tesla had its HQ in California, I asume the deals with local politicians still stand.

Your source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_California

Power conversion inefficiency, distribution matrix maintenance, demand pressure on local energy price, adding toxic batteries and more complex machines to the system, not accounted for.

How will non-hydrocarbon engines polute less when you produce electricity by burning hydrocarbons, 47% for California according to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_California

Then, are you considering power converting inefficiencies, relying in a distribution matrix, burdening the local power production, maybe making prices go up, and adding toxic batteries that end up in a land fill ?

But for people money and beautiful grass is more important than the environment

Edit: Spelling

It would be more significative to REDUCE the spent power, instead of changing the power storage from hydrocarbon to battery, e.g. change the grass to something that doesn't require trimming as often, or at all, like clovers.

But for people, beautiful grass is more important than the environment.