“Many people have been killed going to meetings in Iraq.” It was an offhand remark made by a US military advisor in a casual conversation about virtual work -- its benefits, its pitfalls, its resisters, its committed participants. Until that moment, it had never before crossed my mind that traveling to a face-to-face meeting could be lethal.

Turns out Army commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken measures to reduce travel. “One of the first things I did here was set up a collaborative network to offset the fact that we couldn't travel easily or safely," Lieutenant General Jim Dubik explained in an email to me. "Needless to say, doing so contributed hugely to the coordination of our work.” Dubik is Commanding General of Multinational Security Transition-Iraq. Dubik’s work follows a decade-long history of Web 2.0 and other media experimentation in the US Army (see The Social General).

But war zones aren't the only place benefiting from the virtual workplace. Energy prices are skyrocketing and glaciers melting, making virtual work an increasing necessity for a profitable and responsible business. The Guardian reports on a British study in which executives predict an “exodus from traditional workplace to more home-working.” Three-quarters of those surveyed say their firms will have virtual workforces within a decade. Many already do.

What about you? Could you discharge less CO2, experience less stress, put yourself at lower risk, and make it cheaper all around by staying put? Last fall, The Content Economy, a Swedish blog, picked up on a suggestion on my blog to develop a checklist before traveling to the next face-to-face meeting. Here, for example, are a few questions from the checklist:

• Do you need a day or two of continuous work together?

• Do you have to share “things” that would be difficult to experience at a distance, like touring a facility or using a piece of equipment?

• Have you calculated the true cost of the meeting in terms of direct expenses and personal wear-and-tear?

• Have you done a back-of-the-envelope calculation of the meeting’s contribution to CO2 emissions?

• Do you sometimes travel because you like it or get the feeling that you are important for doing so? Is the meeting you’re planning one of those?

Next, Michael Sampson, a New Zealand collaboration specialist, turned answered the question, “When Do We Need Face Time?” with a flowchart.

Calculating the true benefit of collaboration-at-a-distance does not easily lend itself to traditional return-on-investment calculations, as numerous studies, show. It’s simple to add up the cost of a meeting: consider that a face-to-face for ten people, four from Boston, three from New York, and three from Seattle traveling to Silicon Valley, for a three-day meeting comes to about $10,000. Now make that a meeting for 100 people from more distant locations and you see how that number quickly adds up to astronomic costs. There are other benefits too, like being able to share a market-breaking idea in a conference call, instead being tied up in an airport. Or including experts in meetings who normally couldn't make it in person. Their critical advice might be the difference between a failed venture and a market success.