Congratulations you have identified the fact that a "monetary premium" is just a measure of the network effect of that particular form of money. Now, what makes something a good money?
Discussion
I will keep your analogy of a battery. For me A criteria of good money is predictable expectations of what I can do with the stored energy in the future. What can I get in exchange a year from now for the energy I have stored.
That's a big part of the network effect too though, right?
What are the underlying characteristics of a thing that drive the growth of its network effect?
What did Bitcoin have that has monetized it from zero to $29k in 14 years? What did gold have that made it the domant money for thousands of years? What did wapum have, or african glass beads, or yap stones?
For BTC I think it’s been speculation about future value combined with its particular utility in being resistant to state censorship in illicit goods/services driving demand for the coins as a payment transaction system and if you want possession of a bitcoin you will either mine it or buy it. ASIC computing / energy costs / difficulty level drive the fundamental cost of what it takes to mine a btc and the market for buying BTC has to follow the mining in cost per BTC or else it drives arbitrage behavior which either drives up Bitcoin mining difficulty or the price until equilibrium is reached.
But I don’t think many people are actually using Bitcoin itself as a tradable thing everyone is doing dollar conversion in their head and then using BTC as an intermediary. Then getting back out of BTC. In that case the price volatility is a risk. Or they are holding on speculation of future price increases and not using BTC as a medium of exchange. I think once price stabilizes (eventually) then people will have a price expectation and it can function like money pending appropriate tax treatment, Then a network effect will take place directly with the currency.
He’s either a troll or ignorant or both! 
Nah, IIRC he said he wasn't into bitcoin when he followed me
Ah fair. Ironically, some of his arguments explain bitcoin decently.
“Bitcoin code isn’t scare” pretty much sums up why bitcoin only vs crypto matters.
Network adoption is a bitch to get over in understanding bitcoin if you live in a western (banked) country.
He’ll catch on when it starts to cost $100 for a pound of beef
A good money should be a commodity which is fungible & divisible (hence a basic material) and durable (hence gold rather than another material)
Bit coins aren't a commodity though, they're just a ledger entry like fiat "dollars"
I prefer something real
What does being physical have to do with being divisible & fungible & durable? Why not glass or sand or platinum? And why has paper money worked so well for so long?
Other important aspects are verifiability as well the cost of securing & transporting a thing. How easy is it to secure & trasport large amounts of gold?
Durability is why not sand or platinum (or historical items like copper, silver, salt, etc)
Why does being physical matter? Because reality matters
Why has fiat lasted "so long"? That's a good question, I think largely it's a debt bubble that creates "perpetual" demand for the debt instruments to pay the prior debts. I think it's likely to collapse before too long and we shouldn't model the next monetary system on the worst aspects of the one that's collapsing now.
Sand & platinum are both extremely durable.
Software is part of reality too & facilitates all sorts of very real things.
Debt does play a role, but there is no debt in the creation of Bitcoin.
Why did people naturally choose to use paper notes instead of using gold coins directly?
