One could use the word intelligence when discussing different types of abilities or talents, such as kinestethic- musical- etc, but I'm not sure what the point of that would be?
The psychometric intelligence that IQ tests try to measure, is, as you people noted, only a kind if "raw material" that can be used more or less effectively by it's owner.
("the intelligence quotient is defined as 100 times the Mental Age (MA) divided by the Chronological Age (CA).IQ = 100 MA/CA.")
...is b.t.w outdated, although in the childhood of testing it was used in that way. The term IQ has suvived, although it's no longer a question of a quotient as such.
The raw data from tests are nowadays sqeezed into a bell curve, that compares you to the population in general, and out pops your number
The term g (for general intelligence) is much used and all other aspects of intelligence seem to more or less correlate to this, which is what the tests usually try to measure.
The standard deviation of the test is of vital importance, for the number to have any significance. E.g in a test with a S.D of 15 one would have to be pretty sharp to get >130, whereas in another test with a S.D of 24, the same brain would (theoretically) get >148. Thus the numbers by themselves have no meaning, unless you know the S.D.
I have not seen any evidence that would suggest psychometric intelligence to correlate negatively with happiness, have you?