The instinct is that admitting a point against you costs ground. The opposite is true, and it is true for a specific reason: a reader who can think of an obvious objection and does not see you address it assumes you did not think of it. Naming it, granting what is true in it, and then explaining why your position survives is the difference between an argument and an assertion — and it is exactly what the criterion means by considering the issue.
The family is small and the shape is fixed: concede first, then reverse. “Admittedly, the scheme is expensive; it nevertheless offers the only realistic route to lower emissions.” Doing it in the other order does not work, because a concession that arrives after your conclusion reads as an afterthought that undermines it rather than a weakness you had already priced in.
The grammatical trap is the doubled marker. Spanish allows “aunque… pero”, and the carry-over produces “Although the scheme was expensive, but it went ahead.” English uses one or the other and never both — one relationship, one word announcing it.
The order is fixed. A concession after your conclusion reads as a retraction of it.
Conceding a point nobody made is padding. Concede the objection a reader would actually raise.
“Although … but” is one relationship announced twice. A direct carry-over from “aunque … pero”.
Contrast sets two things side by side. Concession admits one has force and proceeds anyway.
