When Dark Energy was first discovered it was because we noticed that distance type 1A supernovae were dimmer given their perspective redshifts.
However, to determine the Hubble constant in the late universe, astronomers compare the true and apparent brightness of those same distant type 1A supernovae to measure out to their distance. They then compare those distance measurements with how the light from the supernovae is stretched to longer wavelengths by the expansion of space. They use these two values to calculate how fast the universe expands with time, called the Hubble constant.
But again, they also used these same supernovae to determine the existence of Dark Energy. So, is Dark Energy taken into account when they determined the value of the Hubble constant 74 km/s/Mpc which was obtained from the type 1A supernovae measurements?
And if Dark Energy is what's affecting those distant supernovae to make them appear dimmer, is it because Dark Energy has sped up their velocity to 74 km/s/Mpc over time so now they are farther away than excepted? If so, then why are we saying this obtained value of 74 km/s/Mpc, a value we have attributed to dark energy accelerating the expansion of the universe, maybe shouldn't be this value, and therefore, we have a tension?
Or does Dark Energy have nothing to do with the Hubble Constant and its measured value of 74 km/s/Mpc using type 1A supernovae?