Plans to promote widescale use of battery-electric cars still don't take the charging problem into account. They posit some new battery technology that is cheap, holds at least twice as much as Li-ion, and can be recharged in 10 minutes, just like a petrol/diesel car. Even a back of the envelope calculation shows that the power needs of thousands of charging (filling) stations for such batteries would overwhelm existing infrastructure.
Hire cars for longer journeys aren't practical either. If they were only needed for 10% of journeys who would manufacture them, and where would they be refuelled? Most of the demand would be school holidays and long weekends, so either there would be hundreds of thousands of such cars lying idle much of the time, or demand would outstrip supply.
There's also the delivery vehicle problem, even with widespread rail transport for long distance the last 10-50 miles will need to be by road, and there'll need to be a refuelling infrastructure for that anyway. Since that fleet is mostly diesel we could end up with petrol cars being forced off the road and replaced by electric, leaving diesel cars for the long-distance travel, the exact opposite of what governments are pushing for now.
I'd put my money on alternative liquid fuels, like alcohol. Some recent work (last year?) at Oak Ridge labs in the US has shown promise for nanoscale catalysts that can take CO2 and electricity and create alcohol. If it works on a large scale it could provide an answer to storing excess renewable energy at point of generation, help with carbon capture, and produce a fuel that will leave existing infrastructure and vehicles almost unchanged.