FARMERS have won an important battle on emissions trading.

The Federal Government has offered to leave them out of its Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.

But there's no cause for celebration. The CPRS war for farmers is still far from over.

As farm leaders and the Nationals both point out, farmers still face economic risks even if they don't have to account for their own emissions.

They'll be hit with higher electricity, fertiliser, chemical and processing costs as other "covered" sectors pass on their emissions costs.

And if you're not in the CPRS, you don't qualify for "trade-exposed, emissions-intensive" assistance.

Which means you have to rely on claiming credits for absorbing carbon in trees, soil, crops, vegetation and pastures.

Trouble is, only trees are recognised at the moment. The Coalition and the NFF want the other carbon "positives" given similar recognition.

But there are two problems. First, they are complex and difficult to measure. That's what the Government's $42 million four-year research program is all about.

And secondly, world carbon rules, which Australia's signed up to, don't let you claim soil credits unless you also account for big carbon "negatives" such as bushfires.

That's why the US and Asian countries which haven't signed up can offer these credits, and we can't, until the rules are changed.

So there's a lot more the Government must do before farmers can be confident they're not going to be hit for six by the CPRS.

The only guarantee is they'll be left out of the CPRS indefinitely, which will be written into the CPRS legislation.

The rest is all vague commitment.

And of course, what happens if the Government and the Coalition can't reach agreement on an overall CPRS deal within the next week?

Offering to exclude agriculture, which wasn't to be included anyway until 2015, was an easy "give".

Farmers deserve better.