Section A

In the past, economists measured the wealth of a country and its inhabitants according to the amount of income generated annually, using a figure called the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or the Gross National Income (GNI). From GDP or GNI, an average income of individuals within a country could be extrapolated. It was also widely held that the richer a country was, the happier its citizens were. More recently, economists have started to rate countries according to additional criteria like how livable its main cities are; what access to decent education and green space its people have; how safe a country is; and, how clean – or uncorrupt – its government is.

The Human Development Index (HDI) is considered the most reliable of these new economic indicators, but an even more focused measure, the Human Happiness Index (HHI), is steadily gaining in popularity.

Section B

In 2008, Bhutan, a country surrounded by India, Nepal, and China, developed its own Gross National Happiness index to assist in its planning policies. If its inhabitants indicated one of their major concerns was rising fuel costs, then the government attempted to subsidise fuel, not only because it hoped to retain power, but also because if this anxiety were reduced, its citizens would be happier and more productive. Another apprehension of the Bhutanese may be the quality of primary education. Once alerted to this, the state can commence investment. The same year, two famous economists, Amartya Sen and Joseph Stiglitz, were invited by the President of France to devise a happiness index for his country; Britain has recently followed suit.

Section C
There are two common measures of happiness: a global measure and a hedonic measure. The former appraises life in general; the latter a person’s emotional feeling just yesterday. Two measures are considered necessary because altered circumstances produce different results. As any parent can attest, having children makes people happier overall, especially as the children mature and start their own families, yet, on a day-to-day basis, when the children are young, raising them can be difficult: parents may experience stress, anger, and in some rare cases even misery. Globally, parents are glad they have a family; hedonically, they may be going through a bad patch. Likewise employment: a secure enjoyable job contributes greatly to a person’s happiness, but being temporarily unemployed can have a deleterious impact.

Section D
Using both these measures – the global and hedonic – some surprising data have come to light. Firstly, wealthier is indeed happier, but there are still some miserable rich people. Danes and Hong Kong Chinese have almost identical purchasing power, meaning although they earn different amounts of money, what they can do with it is about the same. Yet, on a scale of one to ten, Hong Kongers consistently rate their happiness as 5.5 whereas Danes give theirs as 8. Likewise, incomes in Latin America vary little from those in countries of the former Soviet Union, like Ukraine or Kazakhstan, but Latinos are far healthier, longer-living, and more cheerful.

The second significant finding is that the level of happiness increases with age. Despite the body’s decay and fewer financial resources, older people are more stable, less anxious, and most importantly, less angry. It is now universally agreed that suicide rates worldwide peak in the early forties for women and the early fifties for men. Of 72 countries in one recent poll, the average age was 46 after which life became easier. Ukrainians bucked this trend, not finding happiness until after 62, while the Swiss were fortunate for their discontent to decline from 35.

Section E
Some common beliefs have been confirmed by the happiness data, for instance, that introverted cultures produce more unhappy people. Asians all identified themselves as being unhappier than Western Europeans (with the exception of the Portuguese and Greeks). In 2010, Japan rated highly on the HDI, but near the middle of the HHI. Still, Japan has the world’s longest-living women – 83 years is their average life expectancy – so, if people are generally happier as they age, Japanese women do have longer than women elsewhere in which to get happy!

Section F
What are the reasons for happiness after middle age? Basically, people understand where they fit in the world. Their ambitions have settled to realistic levels – they accept what they can and cannot do. For example, I won’t be able to win the Nobel Prize for Literature, but I could conceivably take first place in a local short-story competition.

Section G
It is good news that people get happier as they grow older because populations in most developed countries are ageing, and projections are for many developing countries to have more people over 50 after 2020. Governments have had some concern about the burden on younger taxpayers of this greying population, but perhaps they should reconsider the data: older people, being happier, are potentially more capable than younger ones. Loss of memory and poorer physical skills are balanced by their cheerfulness. Therefore, the retirement age can be extended without concern about productivity.

Personally, I would rather have a smiling competent grey-haired colleague than a pretty twentysomething who pretends to know it all but, underneath, is a seething mass of discontent.

SPACE-BASED SOLAR POWER

In an energy-hungry world, new safe ways to generate electricity are constantly being sought.

Space-based solar power, or SBSP, is not yet up and running, but several space agencies and commercial companies are keenly pursuing it. SBSP is a system that would harness sunlight in space, convert it into electrical energy, and beam this to receivers in the Earth’s equatorial zone. SBSP satellites would be in low orbit 1100 kilometres (684 miles) above the Earth.

Advantages

To date, solar energy has been collected on the ground, but it is estimated there is 144% more solar power available in space as the Earth’s atmosphere absorbs light. Furthermore, since our planet rotates, energy can only be collected during daylight. It is possible at the poles to collect light almost continuously in summer, but in winter such plants cannot operate due to snow, ice, and darkness. In space, however, solar power collection could occur around the clock. A further benefit may be that the energy produced could be directed to multiple locations whereas terrestrial power plants are limited to sending power one way into a grid.

Design

Most prototypes of SBSP structures look like a giant tent hanging in space. It’s light, the hollow equilateral triangular frame is 336 metres (1103 feet) long while its depth is 303 metres (994 feet). Down two sides are solar collectors, called arrays; on the floor of the ‘tent’ sit a solar converter and a transmitting antenna. The antenna sends microwaves to Earth. These waves are at a frequency of 2.45-5.8 gigahertz, or somewhere between infrared and radio signals. They pass through Earth’s atmosphere easily with only minor energy loss. On Earth, the invisible column of microwave energy – perhaps two to three kilometres (a mile or two) wide – is received by a large oval-shaped ‘rectenna’ – a new word combining ‘rectifying’ + ‘antenna’. A pilot beam, also on Earth, ensures the satellite stays in position in space.

Two major technical obstacles remain before SBSP becomes a reality. The first is launching satellites into orbit. While most scientists favour low orbit, others believe a higher orbit like 36,050 kilometres (22,400 miles), about one-tenth of the distance between Earth and the Moon, would harness more sunlight. However, no agency or company has any experience of launching and controlling a satellite in high orbit, and the cost would be exorbitant. The second problem is the wireless power transmission. While this seemed like a physicist’s fantasy a few years ago, in 2009, US and Japanese researchers successfully sent microwave energy between two islands in Hawaii which are 145 km (90 miles) apart – equidistant to Earth’s atmosphere – but it is unknown whether this can be reproduced in space.

History

SBSP is not a new idea. Dr Peter Glaser designed a system in the late 1960s and was granted a US patent in 1973. The US Department of Energy in conjunction with NASA (the American space agency) conducted feasibility studies in the 1970s, but a conservative administration in the 1980s discontinued investment. Only in 1997 did the US government reconsider the idea.

In 2009, an American commercial company Space Energy Incorporated announced it planned to provide SBSP ‘within a decade’. Subsequently, a company called Solaren stated it was likely to provide 200 megawatts of solar power from an SBSP to Pacific Gas and Electric from 2016. PowerSat Corporation has begun the process of patenting a system of interconnected satellites that will project one extremely powerful microwave beam down to Earth. It has also developed a special thruster to lift a satellite from low orbit into a higher orbit.

Small-scale scientific projects connected to SBSP have long been in operation in Europe. In 2010, several private European firms joined the space power race, and scientific conferences were held on electromagnetic wireless transmission in Italy and Germany.

Japanese initiatives

It is the Japanese, however, who have come nearest to producing a reliable system. Both Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and IHI Corporation currently fund research. Since 1998, JAXA (the Japanese space agency) has been involved in all aspects of SBSP, and it predicts its first satellite will be in orbit by 2030.

There are six broad areas that JAXA is working on. These are (1) general configuration; (2) assembly work and operation; (3) solar array; (4) transmitting antenna; (5) power transmission and reception system; and, (6) testing methods. The first of these is the most developed. The solar array and transmitting antenna are second in terms of development. Testing methods are relatively unsolved. Assembly work and operation, and power transmission and reception system remain far from being solved.

Disadvantages

SBSP has numerous detractors. There are those people who imagine the microwave beam to be something like a science-fiction death ray. Physicists reassure the public it is a non-ionising wave, like a radio wave or x-ray. It cannot displace electrons from atoms to charge particles, so it does not damage DNA. The waves may be slightly warm, but they present no danger to wildlife or humans.

Other opponents of SBSP say that while there is neither corrosion nor damage from plants or animals in space, background radiation could harm the satellite. There is the very real danger of collision with space junk as recently happened at the International Space Station, or with small meteors’ hitting it. The less likely event of an enemy nation firing rockets to destroy the equipment also causes concern. Repairing an unmanned structure so far from Earth would be extremely difficult.

Solar power via the Moon is an option which some scientists say can be in operation in ten years at a fraction of the cost. But the majority of those against SBSP consider it expensive and unnecessary given that many other forms of renewable energy on Earth are operating successfully. Terrestrial solar power is relatively underdeveloped; the Arizona Desert in the US, and deserts across North Africa provide easily-accessible locations for new systems that would be five times more cost-effective than SBSP.

Viability

Nevertheless, as energy requirements accelerate, as unrest in oil-producing regions and nuclear accidents make alternative energy more attractive, space-based solar power may have the future after all.