This study seeks to assess, for the first time by way of a controlled experiment, the technical feasibility of remote interpreting and its impact on human factors such as psychological and physiological stress and fatigue. Overall acceptance of remote interpreting is still rather low, but this study distinguishes clearly between psychological/physiological and technical reasons for low acceptance and confirms that remote interpreting is more tiring than interpreting live in the conference room. Interpreters tire significantly more quickly as evidenced by a faster decline in quality of performance over a 30-minute turn.