You are right, the series doesn't converge uniformly on $[0,+\infty)$, and you have correctly identified the reason for that.
Now all that remains is to make a formal argument of that. We get that from the
Lemma: Let $f_n \colon S \to \mathbb{R}$ be a sequence of functions such that the series $\sum\limits_{n = 0}^{\infty} f_n(x)$ is uniformly convergent on $S$. Then $(f_n)$ converges uniformly to $0$ on $S$.
Proof: Let $g \colon S \to \mathbb{R}$ be the sum of the series, and $p_k(x) = \sum_{n = 0}^k f_n(x)$ the $k^{\text{th}}$ partial sum function. Given $\varepsilon > 0$, by the uniform convergence of the series, there is a $K(\varepsilon) \in \mathbb{N}$ such that
$$\sup \{ \lvert p_k(x) - s(x)\rvert : x \in S\} \leqslant \frac{\varepsilon}{2}$$
for every $k \geqslant K(\varepsilon)$. Then, for every $k > K(\varepsilon)$ and every $x\in S$ we have
\begin{align}
\lvert f_k(x)\rvert &= \lvert p_k(x) - p_{k-1}(x)\rvert = \bigl\lvert \bigl(p_k(x) - s(x)\bigr) + \bigl(s(x) - p_{k-1}(x)\bigr)\bigr\rvert\\
&\leqslant \lvert p_k(x) - s(x)\rvert + \lvert p_{k-1}(x) - s(x)\rvert \leqslant \frac{\varepsilon}{2} + \frac{\varepsilon}{2} = \varepsilon,
\end{align}
whence $\sup \{ \lvert f_k(x)\rvert : x\in S\} \leqslant \varepsilon$ for $k > K(\varepsilon)$, and the uniform convergence of $(f_n)$ to $0$ on $S$ is proved.
In your example, with $f_n(x) = e^{- \lvert x-n\rvert}$ on $\mathbb{R}$, as you observed we have $f_n(n) = 1$ for all $n$, and so the sequence $(f_n)$ doesn't converge to $0$ uniformly on $\mathbb{R}$, whence by the lemma the series cannot converge uniformly on all of $\mathbb{R}$.
But, with a minuscule modification, your argument for the uniform convergence of the series on $(-\infty, 0]$ shows that the series converges uniformly on $(-\infty, A]$ for every $A\in \mathbb{R}$.