You don't need to worry about Google, their priorities are elsewhere, if they are lagging behind the rest of the world, leave them behind.

Getting market share is some function of offering better features, offering more features, or something else. Google can lose that starting today, let them die in their own trap.

The problem with codecs is that you basically need to double-encode/store etc. until you have effectively 100% support in your visitors’ browsers, and that’s uneconomical for all but the largest sites.

As the maintainer of Chrome (and to some extent even all browsers based on Blink), Google currently really does have the power to kill web standards, especially those that have a (less efficient) alternative.

This would be true even if the majority of people would be willing to change browsers over an image codec, which they’re almost certainly not.

Storage is cheap.

What I don't get is why doesn't the Chrome team want to implement support. Does it hurt Google's revenue somehow?

The problem is that, as the dominant browser vendor, it doesn’t hurt them to not support it.

For their own bandwidth efficiency, they can use AVIF, which is supported in Chromium; about everybody else’s they don’t need to care.