Seems most of your savings are coming from the EV usage, which makes a lot of sense if you are using it to drive 15K miles per annum.
Ultimately I think whether high EV or high domestic usage (or both) Solar and battery tech is amazing for saving money and doing some good for the environment whilst at it, the low usage people won't hit the same kind of payback periods we would.
Which is why sometimes things like this don't really make a huge deal of sense to me -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-63300680
The person in this article has a full solar and battery system and is presumably part of a housing estate for social housing where you can imagine it hasn't cost them anything as it's part of the scheme, as the article describes it they've cut their electric bill from £20 a week down to £10 a week. For the cost of £10000-15000 for the installation (probably optimistically cheap), they are saving £520 a year, a payback period of an insanely long period of time.
This level of kit is kind of wasted here, schemes to install solar into the homes of heavy users should be prioritised over things like this in my view.
In this article they are talking about spending £25000 - £55000 to retrofit homes, which also sounds incredibly expensive and has no basis for testing how much these homes actually use or what benefit can be reached with them -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-53022696.
Solar and battery tech is amazing but it should be deployed where it makes the most sense to do so, location as well as usage patterns.