Have they solved the issues of finding enough lithium? Of producing enough electricity to charge all these millions of cars? Of how to dispose of millions of spent batteries over time? And 120 to 150 miles of range isn't going to get you far on a road trip without a lot of hassle. And why not hydrogen which gives about the same range as gas and fills up about as quickly? With water vapor for emissions? Is there some kind of political advantage to having electric cars?
Lithium is easy. Mines are exploding in size and number.
Enough electricity is also not hard. The rate of new adoption is easily compensated for on the grid, except in California, who is permanently dedicated to being totally retarded. They're not solving their electricity problem because they are crazy hippies. It's not hard.
Long road trips in super cold weather aren't common for anyone, and if they do it, it would be a once or twice a year minor impediment. It's grasping at straws to even call that a problem.
As for spent batteries, there won't be any. The batteries will outlast the car body. They will then be adapted to grid storage use once the car is out of service. The battery retains its use. The car body is the thing that has to be scrapped. The world has changed.
Hydrogen will never be adopted in a widespread fashion, because it doesn't have enough advantages to justify overhauling so much infrastructure. Electrics can/will work for almost everything, and diesel/gas can easily do all the rest. There is a massive social expense and hassle to switch any number of cars to hydrogen, for almost no benefit.
